Kapil Dev Rathi vs State Of Uttarakhand on 28 July, 2026

    0
    6
    ADVERTISEMENT

    Uttarakhand High Court

    Kapil Dev Rathi vs State Of Uttarakhand on 28 July, 2026

    Author: Rakesh Thapliyal

    Bench: Rakesh Thapliyal

                     Office
                     Notes,
                    reports,
                   orders or
                 proceedings
    SL.
          Date         or                      COURT'S OR JUDGE'S ORDERS
    No.
                  directions
                      and
                  Registrar's
                  order with
                  Signatures
                                UKHC010127462026
                                C528/1577/2026
    
                                Kapil Dev Rathi
                                                                            --Applicant
                                                  Versus
                                State Of Uttarakhand
                                                                           --Respondent
    
                                Hon'ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J.
    

    1. Mr. Ramji Srivastava, learned counsel for the
    applicant.

    2. Mrs. Meenakshi Sharma and Mr. Himanshu
    Sain, learned A.G.A. for the State.

    SPONSORED

    3. By the instant petition the applicants are
    challenging the proceeding of Special Session Trial No.
    12 of 2025 ‘State vs. Kapil Dev Rathi and Another’,
    wherein, the applicants have been summoned to face
    the trial for the offences punishable under sections 406,
    420 of IPC r/w section 4/5 of The Prize Chits and
    Money Circulation Schemes (Banning) Act, 1978, and
    section 4/22 of The Banning of Unregulated Deposit
    Schemes Act 2019 as well as section 3 of The
    Uttarakhand Protection of Interests of Depositors (In
    Financial Establishments) Act, 2005.

    4. On the previous date the argument was
    advanced by the learned counsel for the applicant that
    both the offences punishable under section 406 and 420
    of IPC cannot be co-existed and both the offences are
    distinct and are independent and, therefore, the
    proceeding is bad in law.

    5. In support of his argument, he placed reliance to
    a judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of
    Arshad Neyaz Khan vs. State of Jharkhand and
    Another
    2025 INSC 1151.

    6. On the previous date, the State was directed to
    examine this judgment and today Mrs. Meenakshi
    Sharma, learned A.G.A. fairly submits that both the
    offences are distinct and independent and cannot co-
    exist; however, she submits that she will file a counter
    affidavit.

    7. Issue notice to respondent no. 2.

    8. Steps be taken within a week.

    9. Let the respondent may file their counter
    affidavit within three weeks.

    10. One week thereafter is granted to the applicants
    to file rejoinder affidavit.

    11. List this matter on 01.09.2026.

    12. In the meantime, the further proceeding of
    Special Session Trial No. 12 of 2025 pending in the
    court of Special Judge, BUDS Act/First Addl. District
    and Session Judge, Dehradun, shall remain stayed.

    (Rakesh Thapliyal, J.)
    28.07.2026
    PR



    Source link

    LEAVE A REPLY

    Please enter your comment!
    Please enter your name here