Uttarakhand High Court
Unknown vs State Of Uttarakhand And Others on 6 August, 2025
Author: Pankaj Purohit
Bench: Pankaj Purohit
2025:UHC:6900
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
Criminal Misc Application No. 1157 of 2025
06th August, 2025
Jagdish Prasad Bhatt .........Applicant
Versus
State of Uttarakhand and others .........Respondents
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Presence:-
Mr. Naman Kamboj, Advocate for the applicant, through video
conferencing.
Mr. Rakesh Negi, B.H. for the State.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Hon'ble Pankaj Purohit, J.
By means of the present C528 application, the
applicant has prayed for setting aside the impugned
judgment and order dated 29.04.2025, passed by the
learned IVth Additional Sessions Judge, Dehradun in
Criminal Revision No. 89 of 2024, Jagdish Prasad Bhatt
vs. Arunendra Singh Chauhan and Others, and the
judgment dated 05.02.2024, passed by the learned Ist
Judicial Magistrate, Dehradun in Complaint Case No.
3234 of 2020.
2. The applicant is an Assistant Accountant
Officer in the Directorate of Medical Education,
Uttarakhand, discovered financial irregularities in the
service records of an Assistant Engineer and reported
them, resulting into the engineer's deputation being
terminated. In retaliation, several accused--employees of
the Secretariat--allegedly conspired to remove the
applicant by forging a transfer order dated 27.11.2018,
using an outdated 2015 order. The applicant learnt of the
forgery through an RTI request and reported it to his
superiors, but no action was taken. He then approached
the Uttarakhand High Court, which directed the State
2025:UHC:6900
Secretary to consider his representation. The forged
transfer order led to stoppage of the applicant's salary for
14 months. A complaint was filed with the SSP,
Dehradun, and the matter was referred for state-level
investigation. The inquiry report categorically stated that
the allegations against the private respondents required
investigation by the Government of Uttarakhand and that
the applicant was at liberty to approach the High Court
to lodge an FIR. The applicant then preferred an
application under Section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C. before the
learned Ist Judicial Magistrate, Dehradun; however, it
was treated as a complaint case and registered as
Complaint Case No. 3234 of 2020, Jagdish Prasad Bhatt
vs. Arunendra Singh Chauhan & Others. This complaint
was dismissed by the learned Ist Judicial Magistrate,
Dehradun, on 05.02.2024. The applicant challenged the
dismissal before the learned IVth Additional Sessions
Judge, Dehradun by filing Criminal Revision No. 89 of
2024. During its pendency, the applicant filed an
application dated 09.08.2024 under Section 391 Cr.P.C.
to bring on record crucial evidence obtained through RTI.
Despite the importance of the documents for effective
adjudication, the court failed to decide the application
separately. Although the applicant moved for disposal of
the Section 391 application, it was ultimately disposed-
off mechanically without proper judicial application of
mind at the time of the final judgment. The learned IVth
Additional Sessions Judge, Dehradun, affirmed the order
dated 05.02.2024 of the learned Ist Judicial Magistrate
and rejected the applicant's application.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that
the IVth Additional Sessions Judge, Dehradun erred in
rejecting Criminal Revision No. 89 of 2024, as the court
2025:UHC:6900
failed to properly apply its judicial mind, especially
considering the RTI-based documents. He contends that
the application under Section 391 Cr.P.C. was
mishandled, as it was kept pending and then disposed-off
without due consideration, resulting in miscarriage of
justice. He further submits that both the courts
overlooked deliberate acts of forgery which caused
serious financial and mental harm to the applicant.
4. Per contra, learned State Counsel submits that
there is no illegality in the orders passed by the courts
below, and hence, no interference is warranted. This is
an attempt to rope in all the Government Officers
including the officer of the rank of Additional Secretary of
the Government of Uttarakhand in a criminal litigation
without any cogent reason.
5. Having considered the submissions of the
learned counsel for the parties and having gone through
the records, this Court is convinced that there is no
illegality or impropriety in the judgments and orders
dated 29.04.2025 and 05.02.2024, passed by the learned
IVth Additional Sessions Judge and Ist Judicial
Magistrate, Dehradun, respectively. The reasons assigned
by the courts below are convincing and do not warrant
interference.
6. Accordingly, the present C528 application is
dismissed.
(Pankaj Purohit, J.)
06.08.2025
SK
