WPCRL/404/2025
2025 Latest Caselaw 5 UK

Uttarakhand High Court

WPCRL/404/2025 on 1 May, 2025

Author: Pankaj Purohit

Bench: Pankaj Purohit

                  Office Notes,
                 reports, orders
                 or proceedings
SL. No.   Date    or directions                                   COURT'S OR JUDGE'S ORDERS
                 and Registrar's
                   order with
                   Signatures


                                   WPCRL No.404 of 2025
                                   Hon'ble Pankaj Purohit, J.

Mr. Aditya Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner.

2. Mr. Bhaskar Ch. Joshi, learned AGA for the State.

3. Mr. Rajendra Dobhal, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Ms. Kavya Mehrishi, Mr. Mayank Datta and Ms. Gurbani Singh, learned counsel for respondent no.3.

4. By means of this writ petition, petitioner has impugned the FIR No.0156 of 2025 dated 24.04.2025, lodged under Sections 420, 467, 468 & 471 IPC, registered at P.S. Kotwali Dehradun, Distt. Dehradun.

5. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that real sister of the petitioner has lodged the present FIR alleging that the informant sister has been thrown out of the Cambrian Hall Society which runs Cambrian Hall School in Dehradun. He further submits that petitioner allegedly put a signature of respondent no.3 in the order-sheet of the learned District Judge, Dehradun in Misc. Case No.75 of 2009. He also submits that respondent no.3 has moved a writ petition before this Court against her removal from the Cambrian Hall Society and when she failed to get any interim order in the said proceedings, the present first information report has been lodged. The writ petition which has been filed by respondent no.3 is numbered as WPMS No.838 of 2025, Amrita Singh vs. Registrar, Firms, Societies and Chits and others.

6. It is also submitted by learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that allegations of forging the signature of respondent no.3 in the order-sheet of District Judge, Dehradun is totally frivolous and concocted one and the same is refuted vehemently.

7. Per contra, learned Senior Advocate appearing for respondent no.3 submits that there are very serious allegations raised against the petitioner committing forgery in the court's record. He placed reliance on the judgment of Apex Court in the case of Siddharth Mukesh Bhandari vs. State of Gujarat and another reported in (2022) 10 SCC 530 to submit that no interim protection could be granted to the petitioner.

8. Learned State Counsel also adopted the argument on the same line as advanced by learned Senior Advocate appearing for respondent no.3.

9. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, this Court is of the view that the matter is still under investigation so far as the allegations of forging the signature are concerned. So far as the judgment cited by learned Senior Advocate for respondent no.3 is concerned, the judgment speaks about the stay of investigation during the pendency of the quashing petition and further it speaks about that no ex parte interim order should be passed by the High Court during the proceedings on the very first day of hearing which is termed as unsustainable. The said case law Siddharth Mukesh Bhandari (Supra) is, therefore, not applicable to the present case in the given set of facts.

10. In this view of the matter, this Court is inclined to interfere in the matter.

11. Respondents may file the counter affidavit in the matter within a period of four weeks.

12. List on 28.07.2025.

13. Till the next date of listing, no coercive measures shall be taken against the petitioner, pursuant to the impugned FIR, provided he cooperates with the investigation.

14. Stay application (IA No.1/2025) stands disposed of accordingly.

(Pankaj Purohit, J.) 01.05.2025 AK