Uttarakhand High Court
C528/1623/2026 of HIMANSHU AGARWAL Vs ANIL RAWAT on 29 July 2026
SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS C528/1623/2026 Himanshu Agarwal --Applicant Versus Rajbeer Singh Rawat --Respondent Hon'ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J. 1. Mr. Bilal Ahmed,
UKHC010131322026
2026:UHC:6543
SL.
No.
Date
Office Notes,
reports, orders
or proceedings
or directions
and Registrar’s
order with
Signatures
COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS
C528/1623/2026
Himanshu Agarwal
--Applicant
Versus
Rajbeer Singh Rawat
--Respondent
Hon'ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J.
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.
1. Mr. Bilal Ahmed, learned counsel for the applicant.
2. The instant petition is moved by the applicant challenging the proceeding initiated against him under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act on the ground that cheque in question regarding which the proceeding has been initiated under the N.I. Act, was, in fact, missing and despite the written complaint, FIR was not registered. Thereafter, he moved an application under Section 175(3) of BNSS 2023 and the same is pending for consideration.
3. The plea as taken in this petition is thoroughly misconceived and this is, in fact, a story cooked up by the applicant which is evident from the fact that with regard to missing of the cheque no FIR is registered.
4. In such view of the matter the instant C528 petition lacks merit and is dismissed. A liberty is being given to the applicant to file fresh C528 petition on other grounds except the plea of missing of cheque.
(Rakesh Thapliyal,J.)
29.07.2026 Parul
UKHC010131322026
2026:UHC:6543