WPCRL/386/2019
2023 Latest Caselaw 146 UK

       IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
                  AT NAINITAL

                       SRI JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI, C.J.

                              10TH JANUARY, 2023
            WRIT PETITION (CRL) NO. 386 OF 2019

Between:
Kunwar Nripendra Singh Rautela                          .............Petitioner.


and


The State of Uttarakhand and others.                         ....Respondents


Counsel for the petitioner.         :   Mr. B.S. Kathayat.

Counsel for the respondents         :   Mr. J.S. Virk, learned Deputy Advocate
                                        General for the State of Uttarakhand.
                                        Mr. Kishore Rai, proxy counsel for Mr.
                                        Mani Kumar, learned counsel for the
                                        private respondent.




Upon hearing the learned Counsel, the Court made the
following

JUDGMENT :

The present petition has been preferred under

Article 227 of the Constitution of India to seek the following

reliefs:-

"a. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari to quashing the order & judgment dated 14.11.2018 passed by the learned Court of Judicial Magistrate 2nd, Haldwani in Criminal Complaint No. 119 of 2016, Kunwar Nripendra Singh Rautela-versus- Ramesh Chandra Pandey & Another, whereby the said learned Court clandestinely overlooked the evidence collected under section 244 Cr.P.C. and disposed of the said case behind the back of the petitioner prior to the date fixed.

b. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari to quashing the orders & judgment dated 04.01.2019 passed by the learned Court of Sessions Judge, Nainital in Criminal Appeal no.-Nill of 2018, Kunwar Nripendra Singh Rautela-versus-State of Uttarakhand & others, whereby the said learned Court unjustly passed the impugned order and disposed of the matter.

c. Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction for administering justice to the petitioner against the respondents no.-02 & 03.

d. Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction directing all the Courts to suo-moto take strict action against all lawbreakers offending dignity of The Advocates inside a Court's premises."

2. Pertinently against the judgment dated 14.11.2018

passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, II, Haldwani in

Criminal Complaint No. 119 of 2016, preferred by the

petitioner, the petitioner had preferred a statutory appeal

under Section 378 Cr.P.C. before the Court of District and

Sessions Judge, Nainital being Criminal Appeal No. 119 of

2018. The said Appeal was taken-up for consideration by

the learned District and Sessions Judge on 04.01.2019, on

which date, the petitioner, unconditionally, withdrew the

said Appeal.

3. Since the petitioner has withdrawn the Appeal against

the judgment dated 14.11.2018, it is not open to the

petitioner to prefer the present petition to assail the same

judgment. Consequently, reliefs 'a' and 'b' sought in this

petition are misconceived. So far as the reliefs 'c' and 'd'

are concerned, they are completely vague.

4. The writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed.

________________ VIPIN SANGHI, C.J.

Dt: 10th January, 2023 Rathour