Uttarakhand High Court
WPCRL/1331/2026 of RAM CHANDRA Vs STATE OF UTTARAKHAND on 11 August 2026
SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS WPCRL/1331/2026 Ram Chandra --Petitioner Versus State Of Uttarakhand --Respondent Hon'ble Alok Mahra, J. Mr. Bhuwan Bhatt, learned
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS
WPCRL/1331/2026 Ram Chandra --Petitioner Versus State Of Uttarakhand --Respondent Hon'ble Alok Mahra, J.
Mr. Bhuwan Bhatt, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Mr. Deepak Bisht, learned Deputy Advocate General for the State of Uttarakhand.
2. The petitioner has filed the present Criminal Writ Petition seeking a direction for conclusion of the investigation in FIR/Case Crime No. 324 of 2016, dated 07.08.2016, under Sections 420, 506, 467, 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code, registered at Police Station Kotwali Jwalapur, District Haridwar.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the F.I.R. was lodged on 07.08.2016 and thereafter no substantial progress was made in the investigation. It is submitted that, on an application moved by the petitioner, the investigation was transferred. After investigation, a final report was submitted. The petitioner filed a protest petition, which was allowed, and the matter was directed to be re- investigated. Upon re-investigation, a closure report was again submitted. The petitioner once again preferred a protest petition, which was allowed, and the Magistrate again directed re- investigation of the matter. During the interregnum, the petitioner approached this Court and, vide order dated
15.09.2022, a Coordinate Bench of this Court directed that the matter be re- investigated by a Special Investigation Team (SIT). Pursuant thereto, an SIT was constituted on 23.03.2023. However, despite the lapse of more than three years since the constitution of the SIT and almost ten years from the date of lodging of the F.I.R., no substantial progress has been made in the investigation.
4. On the previous occasion, the State was directed to file a counter affidavit and seek instructions in the matter.
5. Today, on the basis of written instructions, which are taken on record, learned State Counsel submitted that the supplementary statement of the complainant/petitioner is yet to be recorded and certain documents stated to be in the possession of the petitioner are also required by the SIT. It is submitted that the petitioner has not provided those documents to the investigating agency.
6. Per contra, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is about 83 years of age and is suffering from age-related ailments. It is further submitted that for the last ten years, the petitioner has been continuously pursuing the matter in search of justice.
7. Learned counsel further submitted, on instructions, that the petitioner has already furnished all documents sought by the SIT and that the written instructions placed before the Court do not specify the particular documents allegedly required from the petitioner.
8. Taking into consideration that the F.I.R. was lodged on 07.08.2016 and that, despite the constitution of the SIT in the year 2023, no substantial progress has been made in the investigation, this Court finds the pace of investigation to be wholly unsatisfactory.
9. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the SIT is directed to conclude the investigation at the earliest, preferably within a period of six months from today. If any further documents are required from the petitioner, the SIT shall clearly specify the same and, considering the advanced age and physical condition of the petitioner, may obtain such documents by visiting the petitioner's residence, if necessary. The petitioner shall also extend full cooperation and furnish all documents required by the SIT.
10. With the aforesaid directions, the writ petition stands disposed of.
(Alok Mahra, J.) 11-08-2026 SB
SHIKSHA BINJOLA Digitally signed by SHIKSHA BINJOLA DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=3410ef86ae41ec9fbabcd5dba6b3a2c24b5aa08b09c12f2 1822fbd40bf639b1c, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=FD80A2D028949381C52796A542D7FF0A9BED00E 67B5283D205F18FE29BDF5DD9, cn=SHIKSHA BINJOLA Date: 2026.08.11 18:26:03 +05'30'