Unknown vs State Of Uttarakhand And Others
2025 Latest Caselaw 3803 UK

Uttarakhand High Court

Unknown vs State Of Uttarakhand And Others on 21 April, 2025

Author: Pankaj Purohit

Bench: Pankaj Purohit

                                                                   2025:UHC:2822



     HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
         Criminal Misc. Application U/s 482 No. 500 of 2022
                                 21st April, 2025

Jyoti                                                       ............Applicant

                                      Versus

State of Uttarakhand and others                              .........Respondents
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Presence:-
Mr. Vinayak Pant, Advocate for the applicant.
Mr. B.C. Joshi, A.G.A. with Ms. Rangoli Purohit, B.H. for the State.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Hon'ble Pankaj Purohit, J. (Oral)

The present C482 application has been filed by the applicant for quashing the order dated 18.01.2021, passed by learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jaspur, Udham Singh Nagar, whereby application under Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C. moved by the applicant was dismissed as well as the judgment and order dated 03.01.2022 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Udham Singh Nagar, in Criminal Revision No.29 of 2021, whereby revision against the order dated 18.01.2021 has been dismissed and further to direct the concerned police to lodge an F.I.R. against private respondents.

2. Facts of the case in brief are that applicant worked as a Clerk in Housing & Construction Co-operation Union, Kashipur, private respondents were high rank officers in the said organization who on several occasions allegedly made physical relations with the applicant by threatening and coercing her. When after tolerating the said abuse for almost 8-9 months, she eventually tried to file a complaint on which she was removed from job by the private respondents.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that in spite of clear law laid by the Hon'ble Supreme Court to lodge an F.I.R. in facts showing commission of cognizable offence the courts below

2025:UHC:2822 committed grave irregularity in dismissing the application under Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C.

4. Per contra, learned State counsel submits that in spite of being a literate lady she did not lodge a complaint and waited 8-9 months and the courts below after following due procedure have correctly dismissed the said application.

5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and going through the record of the case, this Court is of the opinion that court below have after due appraisal of facts available on record have rightly disbelieved the story of the applicant.

6. From bare perusal of the record, it transpires that the story of the applicant is dubious in nature carrying mere allegations without specifying any particulars, therefore, this Court opines that no interference is required in the sound reasoning given by learned trial court as well as by learned revisional court. No interference is warranted.

7. Accordingly C482 application is hereby dismissed.

(Pankaj Purohit, J.) 21.04.2025 SK