Research › Search › Judgment

Uttarakhand High Court · body

2016 DIGILAW 697 (UTT)

RISHI RAM KRISHAN CHELA RISHI KESHWANANDA JI v. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

2016-10-03

SUDHANSHU DHULIA

body2016
JUDGMENT Hon’ble Sudhanshu Dhulia, J. (Oral) 1. The applicant before this Court is accused in Criminal Case No.1262 of 2008. After investigation, the police has submitted the charge sheet against the applicant under Sections 420/467/468 & 471 of IPC. Thereafter, learned Magistrate took cognizance and summoned the present applicant vide summoning order dated 12.03.2008. Hence, the applicant had taken recourse of the inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., and filed the present Criminal Miscellaneous Application in the year 2008. Present Criminal Miscellaneous Application was admitted on 05.09.2008 and further proceeding in the trial was stayed. Thereafter from perusal of the order sheet, it appears that the matter was simply adjourned and the matter finally came up before this Court on 29.11.2013 and on the said date, the stay granted by this Court was vacated by the following order:- “Mr. Swapnil Bisht, Advocate, holding brief of Mr. Jitendra Chaudhary, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Amit Kapri, Brief Holder, for the State. The matter is pending since 2008 and the proceedings have been stayed. Mr. Swapnil Bisht, Advocate, holding brief of Mr. Jitendra Chaudhary, apprised the court that his client is not responding. In the above circumstances, stay granted by this Court on dated 05.09.2008 is hereby vacated. Inform the court below to proceed the trial ahead.” 2. Consequently, the recall application was filed, which was dismissed as not pressed. The matter is, therefore, being heard finally. 3. The applicant has not pointed out any procedural anomaly in the proceedings before the court below. The applicant is named in the charge sheet and he must face trial. This is not a case where inherent powers of the Court under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. can be invoked. Criminal Miscellaneous Application is dismissed. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant had also submitted that the matter is actually of civil in nature, which is unnecessarily given the colour of criminal case. This aspect, however, remains to be examined by the learned Magistrate, who shall look into this aspect. Applicant is hereby directed to appear before the court concerned. He, however, shall be at liberty to move an application for bail before the court concerned which shall be considered as expeditiously as possible. 5. The Registrar General of this Court is hereby directed to communicate the concerned Magistrate about this order for onward compliance.