Uttarakhand High Court
Unknown vs State Of Uttarakhand And on 9 September, 2025
Author: Pankaj Purohit
Bench: Pankaj Purohit
p
Office Notes,
reports, orders or
SL. proceedings or
Date COURT'S OR JUDGES'S ORDERS
No directions and
Registrar's order
with Signatures
C-528 No.1510 of 2025
Hon'ble Pankaj Purohit, J.
Mr. Abhishek Verma, Advocate for the applicant
appeared through video conferencing.
2. Mr. Chitrarth Kandpal, Brief Holder for the State.
3. Heard Mr. Abhishek Verma, learned counsel for the
applicant and Mr. Chitrartha Kandpal, learned Brief Holder
for the State.
4. By means of the present C-528 application, the
applicant has prayed for the relief for setting aside the
order dated 17.07.2025 passed by 1st Additional Sessions
Judge, Roorkee, District Haridwar in Criminal Revision
No.74 of 2024, Rohitash vs. State of Uttarakhand and
others whereby the revision petition has been rejected as
well as the judgment and order dated 03.06.2024 passed
by the learned Judicial Magistrate-I, Roorkee, District
Haridwar in Misc. Application No.140 of 2024, Rohitash vs.
Aviraj and others, whereby the application under Section
156(3) of the Cr.P.C. for registration of the FIR has been
rejected.
5. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that an
incident happened on 23.04.2024 involving son of the
applicant, namely, Pravesh alias Pintu as well as
respondent nos.2, 3 and 4, wherein allegedly the
respondent no.3-Vipul S/o Beer Singh fired the gunshot
upon the son of the applicant.
6. It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant
that the First Information Report bearing FIR No.0328 of
2024, under Section 307 of IPC, was immediately lodged
by the mother of the respondent no.2, while on the same
application which has been moved by the applicant for the
registration of the FIR to the SHO, no FIR has been
registered.
7. The applicant moved an application to the Senior
Superintendent of Police on 07.05.2024 for registration of
the FIR, but that also yielded no result. Consequently,
under Section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C. an application has
been moved in the court of Judicial Magistrate-I, Roorkee,
District Haridwar. The said application is rejected by the
learned Magistrate vide judgment and order dated
03.06.2024 after receiving the police report from the
concerned Police Station. The applicant filed the revision
that too was rejected as stated earlier.
8. It is contended by the learned counsel for the
applicant that the FIR, which has been given by the
applicant to the S.H.O., Police Station Manglore, discloses
the commission of a cognizable offence and when the fight
involving the parties earlier took place, it was obligatory
on the part of the S.H.O. to register both the FIRs, so that
justice may be done between the parties. On the same
grounds, he assailed the impugned orders.
9. This Court finds substance in the submission made
by the learned counsel for the applicant.
10. Issue notice to the respondent nos.2 to 4 returnable
within four weeks. Steps to be taken within three days.
11. List this case on 10.11.2025.
(Pankaj Purohit, J.)
09.09.2025
Ravi
