Supreme Court – Daily Orders
Ravi Rastogi vs The State Of Uttarakhand on 9 July, 2026
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 528 OF 2022
RAVI RASTOGI APPELLANT(S)
VERSUS
THE STATE OF UTTARAKHAND & ANR. RESPONDENT(S)
O R D E R
1. The present Criminal Appeal calls in question the
correctness of the order dated 31.05.2019 in Criminal Misc.
Application No. 853 of 2019, passed by the High Court of
Judicature at Uttarakhand at Nainital. By the said order,
the petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure, 1973 (for short, ‘the Cr.P.C.’), filed by the
appellant herein, seeking quashment of the charge-sheet
dated 30.06.2017 and the summoning order dated 30.05.2018,
in Criminal Case No. 1824 of 2018 for the offences
punishable under Sections 323, 387 and 504 of the Indian
Penal Code, 1860 (for short, ‘the IPC’) pending before the
Signature Not Verified
learned Civil Judge, (Jr. Div.)/Judicial Magistrate,
Digitally signed by
JAGDISH KUMAR
Date: 2026.07.13
17:26:53 IST
Reason: Khatima, District Udham Singh Nagar, was declined.
1
2. We have heard Mr. Md. Rashid Saeed, learned counsel
for the appellant and Mr. Sunny Sachin Rawat, learned
counsel for the respondent-State of Uttarakhand.
3. It is the appellant’s case that on 23.03.2017, there
was an incident, in which the respondent No. 2, threatened
the appellant and warned him of dire consequences. The
appellant gave a written complaint on 23.03.2017 and the
FIR bearing No. 146 of 2017, came to be registered only on
03.04.2017 against respondent No. 2 and other co-accused
persons namely, Pooran Chauhan, Titu, Saurabh Singhal and
Chandan Kashyap, for the offences punishable under Sections
147, 323, 504 and 506 of the IPC.
4. According to the appellant, as a counter-blast, the
respondent No. 2 lodged an FIR No. 149 of 2017 dated
04.04.2017 against the appellant, for the offences
punishable under Sections 147, 148, 323, 504 and 384 of the
IPC. Learned counsel submits that while a closure report
was initially filed by the police in the FIR registered by
the appellant, subsequently, he filed a protest petition
and the protest petition has since been allowed and
investigation ordered. Learned counsel further submits that
investigation is still pending.
5. In the meantime, in the FIR registered against the
appellant, charge-sheet came to be filed on 30.06.2017 and
2
the Magistrate took cognizance and issued summons on
30.05.2018 for the offences set out hereinabove.
6. Heard learned counsel and perused the records.
7. We are of the opinion that considering the nature of
the matter, the criminal proceedings cannot be quashed
under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C.
8. At this stage, learned counsel for the appellant
submits that he will avail his remedy of filing an
application for discharge. Learned counsel prays that if
such a remedy is resorted to, the same should be decided
uninfluenced by the observations in the impugned order.
9. We find merit in this prayer of the appellant.
10. While not interfering with the impugned order, which
has refused to quash the charge-sheet and the order of
cognizance, we grant liberty to the appellant to resort
such other remedies available to him in law, including the
filing of an application for discharge.
11. In case, such remedies are resorted to, the same
shall be decided on their own merits, uninfluenced by the
observations in the impugned order or in the present order
made by us.
12. With the above observation, the appeal is disposed
of.
3
13. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed
of.
………………………………………………………J.
[K.V. VISWANATHAN]
………………………………………………………J.
[ALOK ARADHE]
NEW DELHI;
09th July, 2026
4
ITEM NO.106 COURT NO.13 SECTION II-B
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Criminal Appeal No(s). 528/2022
RAVI RASTOGI Appellant(s)
VERSUS
THE STATE OF UTTARAKHAND & ANR. Respondent(s)
Date : 09-07-2026 This appeal was called on for hearing today.
CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE K.V. VISWANATHAN
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE
(PARTIAL COURT WORKING DAYS BENCH)
For Appellant(s) : Mr. Md. Rashid Saeed, AOR
Mr. Amjad Saleem, Adv.
For Respondent(s) :Mr. Sudarshan Singh Rawat, AOR
Mr. Sunny Sachin Rawat, Adv.
Ms. Rachna Gandhi, Adv.
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
1. The appeal is disposed of in terms of the signed
order placed on the file.
2. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed
of.
(RAHUL KUMAR) (MANOJ KUMAR)
COURT MASTER (SH) COURT MASTER (NSH)
5
