9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (12) TMI 1219X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd Respondents 3 and 4 filed a petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short "the Code") in the High Court of Uttarakhand at Nainital for quashing of the above mentioned proceedings and for quashing of the order of cognizance dated 22/3/2005 passed thereon by the Judicial Magistrate, Khatima against the Appellant and the other accused for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420, 467, 468, 471, 447, 448 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (for short "the Indian Penal Code"). By order dated 29/09/2011 Uttarakhand High Court dismissed the said petition. The said order is impugned in this appeal. 3. Respondent 2 filed a complaint against the Appellant, Respondents 3, 4 and five others at Police Stati ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ounsel for the Appellant submitted that the complaint discloses civil dispute. A civil suit has been filed by the Appellant making similar grievance. It is pending. Since the Civil Court is seized of the dispute, the High Court should have quashed the complaint. 5. It is necessary to note here that office report dated 22/8/2012 indicates that the contesting Respondent i.e. Respondent 2 was directed to be served through Resident Commissioner vide Registrar's order dated 5/12/2011. He has accordingly been served. He has, however, neither cared to appear in-person nor has he engaged any counsel. We, therefore, proceed to deal with the submissions of counsel for the Appellant. 6. Though the complaint attributes forgery and fabrication of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... basis of fabricated documents. It is categorically stated on affidavit by the Appellant that the said suit is still pending. If the said suit is still pending, then the grievance made by Respondent 2 that the documents on which reliance is placed by the Appellant are not genuine and are forged and fabricated, will be considered by the Civil Court. It is also significant to note that prior to the filing of this complaint, Respondent 2 tried to lodge an FIR against the Appellant by moving an application under Section 156(3) of the Code. But the said application was dismissed on 6/5/2004. We notice from the impugned order that a separate case under Section 406 of the Indian Penal Code was filed by Respondent 2 against the Appellant in which th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uld not hesitate to quash criminal proceedings to prevent abuse of process of court. 8. As we have already noted, here the dispute is essentially about the profit of the hotel business and its ownership. The pending civil suit will take care of all those issues. The allegation that forged and fabricated documents are used by the Appellant can also be dealt with in the said suit. Respondent 2's attempt to file similar complaint against the Appellant having failed, he has filed the present complaint. The Appellant has been acquitted in another case filed by Respondent 2 against him alleging offence under Section 406 of the Indian Penal Code. Possession of the shop in question has also been handed over by the Appellant to Respondent 2. In ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
