Unknown vs State Of Uttarakhand And Others As Well ...
2026 Latest Caselaw 1684 UK

Uttarakhand High Court

Unknown vs State Of Uttarakhand And Others As Well ... on 9 March, 2026

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

                                 C-528 No. 331 of 2026
                                 Hon'ble Alok Mahra, J.

Mr. Rajendra Singh Azad, learned counsel for the applicant.

2. Ms. Pushpa Bhatt, learned D.A.G. alongwith Mr. S.C. Dumka, learned A.G.A. for the State.

3. The present Criminal Misc. Application under Section 528 of BNSS has been filed by the applicant challenging the impugned order dated 15.12.2025 passed by learned 1st Additional Session Judge, Roorkee, District Haridwar in Criminal Revision No. 44 of 2025, Dharamvir Singh Saini Vs. State of Uttarakhand and Others as well as the impugned order dated 21.03.2025 passed by learned ACJM, Roorkee, District Haridwar in Criminal Misc. Application No. 31 of 2025, Dharamvir Singh Saini Vs. Om Prakash and Others, under Sections 175(3) of BNSS, whereby application under Section 175(3) of BNSS moved by the applicant has been rejected.

4. The facts of the case, in a nutshell, are that the applicant filed an application under Section 175(3) BNSS against the opposite parties on 06.03.2025, being Misc. Case No. 31 of 2025, which was dismissed by learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Roorkee, District Haridwar vide order dated 21.03.2025, holding that the dispute was civil in nature and did not disclose a cognizable offence. A revision against the said order being Criminal Revision No. 44 of 2025 was filed, which too was dismissed by the court of learned 1st Additional Session Judge, Roorkee, District Haridwar vide order dated 15.12.2025. Feeling aggrieved by both the impugned orders, the applicant has filed the present misc. application before this Court.

5. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and perused the record.

6. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that Section 175(3) of BNSS confers the power to the Magistrate to take the cognizance or to direct for the investigation, but, the Magistrate out rightly rejected the application of the applicant on the ground that the dispute is civil in nature.

7. Per contra, learned State Counsel would submit that learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate has rightly rejected the application moved by the applicant under Section 175(3) of BNSS, by a detailed and reasoned order dated 21.03.2025, as the dispute was essentially civil in nature and the revision filed against this order was also dismissed by the court of learned 1st Additional Session Judge, Roorkee, District Haridwar vide order dated 15.12.2025.

8. Perusal of the impugned orders passed by learned Magistrate reveals that he has considered & discussed all relevant aspects. Thus, the view taken by the learned Magistrate, cannot be faulted. Learned Revisional Court was thus justified in dismissing the Revision Petition. Thus, this Court does not find any reason to interfere with the impugned orders.

9. Accordingly, the criminal misc. application fails and is hereby dismissed.

(Alok Mahra J.) 09.03.2026 Ujjwal