Pawan Sardar And Ors vs State Of Uttarakhand & Another

Pankaj Purohit, J

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

By means of this C528 application, applicants have put to challenge cognizance/summoning order dated 20.03.2023 as well as the entire

proceedings of Criminal Case No.22 of 2023, State vs. Pawan Sardar and others, under Sections 342, 384, 452 & 504 IPC, P.S. Laksar, District

Haridwar, pending in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate, Laksar, Haridwar.

It is contended by learned counsel for the applicants that an FIR was lodged by Stone Crusher Association against certain named persons under

various sections of IPC for the offence of marpeet & extortion of money. He also submits that the applicants were not named in the FIR and were

also not present at the alleged place of occurrence.

It is further submits by learned counsel for the applicants that Investigating Officer without proper investigation implicated the applicants in the

charge-sheet and learned trial court without application of judicial mind took cognizance and summoned the applicants to face the trial.

Learned State Counsel submits that the learned trial court has rightly taken the cognizance against the applicants as there are specific allegation

against the applicants.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and carefully perused the entire documents available on record.

From perusal of the FIR, prima facie, the commission of cognizable offence is made out against the applicants. This Court while sitting in the

inherent jurisdiction under Section 528 of BNSS Act, 2023 is not enjoined to sift the evidence between the parties and the same can be done only by

the trial court. Accordingly, no case is made out to interfere in the present C528 application and the same is dismissed in-limine.

Pending application, if any, stands disposed of.