MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION 1372 of 2012 on 31 December 2012

1. Yogendra Prasad 2. Anup Goswami 2. Anup Goswami

Versus

………..Applicants

State of Uttarakhand and another

………Respondents

Hon’ble Servesh Kumar Gupta, J.

Mr. Deep Joshi, Advocate, for the petitioners.

Mr. P.S. Danu, Brief Holder, for the State.

Learned counsel has argued that no case u/s 458/326 I.P.C. is made out against the petitioners, but even the chargesheet has been submitted for the said offences.

The said contention is wholly baseless. This Court cannot make a pre-trial looking to the entire facts in detail while exercising powers u/s 482 Cr.P.C. The Hon’ble Apex Court, time and again, has held that the purpose of Section 482 Cr.P.C. is not to make the scrupulous examination of each and every minute detail so that to give an impression of a pre-trial before the actual trial commences in the court of Magistrate. Moreover, it appears that there is a permanent privation of the part of index finger of the injured, and thus, prima facie, the offence punishable u/s 326 IPC is clearly made out against the petitioners.

In view of the above, the petition is bereft of any merit and liable to be dismissed at the threshold. Petition is dismissed accordingly.

(Servesh Kumar Gupta, J.)