[Cites 6, Cited by 0]
Uttarakhand High Court
C528/657/2026 on 10 April, 2026
Office Notes,
reports, orders
or proceedings
SL.
Date or directions COURT'S OR JUDGE'S ORDERS
No.
and Registrar's
order with
Signatures
C-528 No.657 of 2026
Hon'ble Alok Mahra, J.
Mr. Raj Kumar Singh, learned
counsel for the applicant.
2. Mr. V.S. Pal, learned A.G.A. for the
State.
3. Present C-528 application has been
filed seeking quashing of the charge-
sheet as well as the
cognizance/summoning order dated
14.11.2025 passed by the learned
Judicial Magistrate 1st Dehradun in
Criminal Case No. 7654 of 2025, for the
offences punishable under Sections 420,
467, 468, 471 and 120-B I.P.C. and
Section 66-D of the Information
Technology Act, 2000, along with the
entire proceedings arising therefrom.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant
would submit that the F.I.R. in the
present case was initially lodged against
unknown persons alleging fraudulent
duplication of money from the
complainant's account; that, during the
course of investigation, three persons,
namely Ravi Saini, Rahul Kumar and
Anurag Shukla, were identified, in whose
bank accounts the alleged defrauded
amount was transferred, and the mobile
phone used in the commission of the
offence was also recovered from them.
5. It is further submitted that the
present applicant has falsely been
implicated solely on the basis of the
confessional statements of the co-
accused persons and no independent
material has been collected by the
investigating agency to connect the
applicant with the alleged offence.
6. Learned counsel further submits
that the applicant is engaged in the
business of interior work and had taken
a house on rent in Laxmi Nagar, Delhi,
in the year 2023 for the purposes of his
business. However, due to illness, the
said premises remained unused for a
considerable period; that, co-accused
Rahul Kumar, being only friend to the
applicant, requested for use of the said
premises for his business activities,
which the applicant permitted in good
faith without having any knowledge of
the alleged illegal activities.
7. It is also submitted that a perusal
of the charge-sheet would reveal that
neither any part of the alleged defrauded
amount has been credited to the account
of the applicant nor any incriminating
material, including the mobile phone
allegedly used in the commission of the
offence, has been recovered from his
possession, therefore, the implication of
the applicant is stated to be wholly
arbitrary and unsustainable in the eyes
of law.
8. Having heard learned counsel for
the applicant and upon perusal of the
material available on record, this Court
finds some substance in the submissions
of learned counsel for the applicant,
which requires consideration.
9. Issue notice to respondent no.2,
returnable within six weeks.
10. Steps to be taken within one week.
11. List this after service of notice.
12. Objections, if any, be filed by the
State/respondent.
13. Meanwhile, as an interim measure,
it is provided that further proceedings of
Criminal Case No. 7654 of 2025, pending
before the court of learned Judicial
Magistrate 1st, Dehradun, shall remain
stayed qua the applicant till the next
date of listing.
(Alok Mahra, J.)
10.04.2026
Mamta
