Hon'Ble Vivek Bharti Sharma vs State & Another Passed By
2024 Latest Caselaw 2012 UK

Uttarakhand High Court

Hon'Ble Vivek Bharti Sharma vs State & Another Passed By on 4 September, 2024

Author: Vivek Bharti Sharma

Bench: Vivek Bharti Sharma

                                                                                                                                              2024:UHC:6505
                Office Notes,
             reports, orders or
SL.           proceedings or
      Date                                                                                                        COURT'S OR JUDGE'S ORDERS
No.            directions and
             Registrar's order
              with Signatures
                                  C482 No.190 of 2017
                                  Hon'ble Vivek Bharti Sharma, J.

None is present for the petitioner.

2. Mr. Deepak Bisht, learned Deputy Advocate General for the State.

3. The present C-482 petition has been filed by the petitioner to quash the judgment and order dated 10.11.2016 passed in Criminal Revision No.217 of 2016, Darshan Kumar Vs. State & Another passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Laksar, District Haridwar and stay the effect and operation of the aforesaid judgment.

4. Perusal of the record reveals that the dispute between the parties is relating to the property. It is stated in the petition that the FIR lodged against the petitioner is absolutely false and fictitious and the petitioner has simply been made scapegoat by the complainant/ respondent to serve his ulterior motive.

5. Counsel for the State would submit that the case is pending since 2017 and even the service is incomplete and there is no stay in the matter; that, after 2017, the present petition has been listed today but there is no one to represent the petitioner, which shows that the petitioner himself is not serious to pursue his case; that, it is a matter of trial whether the FIR lodged against the petitioner is false and the petitioner has been made scapegoat by the complainant/ respondent to serve his ulterior motive or not, therefore, the petition may be dismissed.

6. Having considered the submissions and after going through the record available on file, this Court is of the considered view that it is not a fit case, in which, the High Court in exercise of its inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. should venture into the propriety of the matter.

7. In view of the above, there is no good ground made out to interfere in the impugned order, accordingly, the writ petition fails and is hereby dismissed in limine.

(Vivek Bharti Sharma, J.) SUKHBANT

DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF

2.5.4.20=71978f9c61bfde0ba69967c787b1764ea7bc7dd129a8a6380d49 04.09.2024 SINGH b1885e628615, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND,

SS serialNumber=2D8B71B8D8E345F6B7F95B1DD4FB4BEBD2B7D72C42261 361AED33172F152148D, cn=SUKHBANT SINGH Date: 2024.09.07 11:51:55 +05'30'