Ankit Giri And Ors vs State Of Uttarakhand And Ors.

Pankaj Purohit, J

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

By means of the present C528 application, the applicants have put to challenge the charge-sheet dated 13.08.2024 under Sections 435, 120-B IPC,

cognizance/summoning order dated 17.12.2024 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate-II, Roorkee, District Haridwar in Criminal Case No.2556 of

2024 State Vs. Ankit Giri and Others, along with the entire proceedings of the aforesaid criminal case.

It is contended in the FIR, that on 08.11.2023, there was some dispute about the parking of the vehicle with Devraj, Sunil S/o Late Dr. Dinesh

Kumar, Pankaj S/o Virendra, Babloo S/o Ilam, Sunny S/o Umesh, Harendra and Neeraj S/o Late Subash and after that incident, the respondent No.2-

informant was threatened that he and his vehicle would be destroyed and also with his life. It is also contended in FIR that on 24.11.2023, in late night,

the vehicle of respondent No.2 Alto LXI No.UP14V1356 was blasted and turned into heavy fireball; the respondent No.2-informant and his family

members came out of the house and saw one person was running from the spot. It was seen from the CCTV footage that person was carrying a bag

and there was some combustible substance kept in the bottle in his hand, who was sprinkling the combustible material on the vehicle of respondent

No.2.

Thereafter, the FIR was lodged against the unknown persons. After investigation, the charge-sheet was submitted by the police against the

applicants, on being, prima-facie proved that the applicants have committed the offence of Section 435, 120-B IPC. The Investigating Officer

reached to this conclusion on the basis of the CCTV footage and statements recorded during investigation.

It is contended by learned counsel for the applicants that the applicants have not been named in the FIR and they are the suspected persons who

were working a nearby shop where the incident happened. She further contended that the applicants have falsely been implicated in the aforesaid

criminal case.

I have perused the FIR and charge-sheet. Since the offences lodged against the applicants are very serious in nature and their presence were

prima-facie proved by the CCTV footage, therefore, this is not a case where the Court should interfered with. Moreover, the Court cannot sift

evidence while hearing an application under Section 528 of BNSS 2023.

Accordingly, the present C528 application is dismissed in-limine.

Pending application, if any, also stands disposed of.