Uttarakhand High Court
Prem Singh vs State Of Uttarakhand And Others on 18 September, 2024
Author: Pankaj Purohit
Bench: Pankaj Purohit
2024:UHC:6726
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
Writ Petition Misc. Single No. 2450 of 2024
Prem Singh --Petitioner
Versus
State Of Uttarakhand and Others --Respondents
Presence:-
Mr. S.S. Yadav, learned counsel for petitioner.
Mr. Suyash Pant and Mr. Yogesh Chandra Tewari,
learned Standing Counsels for the State of
Uttarakhand/ respondent Nos.1, 2, 3 & 5.
Ms. Seema Sah, learned counsel for respondent
No.6.
Hon'ble Pankaj Purohit, J.
It is the case of the petitioner that the
petitioner was proceeded in a criminal litigation
launched by the respondent No.5 and the case was
registered as Criminal Case No.428 of 2010 State Vs.
Prem Singh, in the Court of learned Chief Judicial
Magistrate, Pauri Garhwal. Vide judgment and order
dated 30.08.2011, learned CJM, Pauri Garhwal, has
convicted and sentenced the petitioner under Section
465 IPC for a period of one year's rigorous
imprisonment and under Section 468 for a period of
three years' rigorous imprisonment with fine of
Rs.2,000/- and with default stipulation of further two
months' additional imprisonment.
2. Feeling aggrieved by his conviction and
sentence, petitioner-Prem Singh along with other co-
accused persons filed a Criminal Appeal in the Court
2024:UHC:6726
of Sessions Judge, Pauri Garhwal, which was
registered as Criminal Appeal No.37 of 2011 Prem
Singh and Others Vs. State of Uttarakhand. Learned
Sessions Judge, Pauri Garhwal vide judgment and
order dated 16.06.2015, allowed the appeal and set
aside the judgment and order passed by learned trial
court dated 30.08.2011 and acquitted petitioner from
the aforesaid charges.
3. Now, petitioner has approached this Court
by filing present writ petition, for a compensation of
Rs.1,00,00,000/-(Rupees One Crore only), as
according to the petitioner, he has been dragged in a
false litigation by the respondent No.5 and his entire
life and money was spent in the said litigation.
4. A preliminary objection has been raised by
the learned State Counsel and learned counsel for
respondent No.6 that had it been a case that the
petitioner has wrongly been dragged in the litigation
in a Criminal Court, petitioner has a right under the
private law remedy by filing a suit for malicious
prosecution and he cannot straightway come before
this Court by filing the present writ petition. It is
further submitted by learned State Counsel and
learned counsel for respondent No.6 that there are
many disputed question of facts involved in the
aforesaid litigation as to whether the petitioner has
been falsely implicated and maliciously prosecuted in
the criminal litigation or not. In that view of the
matter, the writ petition cannot be maintainable
before this Court.
2024:UHC:6726
5. Having heard the submission made by
learned counsel for the parties and after going
through the material available on record, this Court
finds favour with the objection raised by learned
counsel for the respondents that the remedy of filing
a civil suit of malicious prosecution is always
available, if the petitioner feels that he has dragged in
a false and malicious criminal litigation.
6. In this view of the matter, this Court
doesn't find any merit in the present writ petition.
Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed in-limine.
(Pankaj Purohit, J.)
18.09.2024
PN
PREETI Digitally signed by PREETI NEGI
NEGI
DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=63c75a8c4765581180a58d7478fadbe38331bac55c78b5f9f0276c16432f6aab, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND,
serialNumber=2BA53171893B3C3CB3CCCAE81FAE064498483A83D84BDB0F9229D5BF08D959AC, cn=PREETI NEGI
Date: 2024.09.18 18:55:40 +05'30'
