Become a member

Get the best offers and updates relating to Liberty Case News.

― Advertisement ―

HomeHigh CourtUttarakhand High CourtWPCRL/794/2025 on 29 July, 2025

WPCRL/794/2025 on 29 July, 2025


Uttarakhand High Court

WPCRL/794/2025 on 29 July, 2025

Author: Pankaj Purohit

Bench: Pankaj Purohit

                                                                                      2025:UHC:6593
                Office Notes,
             reports, orders or
SL.           proceedings or
      Date                                              COURT'S OR JUDGE'S ORDERS
No.            directions and
             Registrar's order
              with Signatures

                                  WPCRL No.794 of 2025
                                  Hon'ble Pankaj Purohit, J.

Mr. Amit Kapri, Advocate for the petitioner.

2. Mr. S.C. Dumka, A.G.A. with Ms. S.B. Dobhal,
B.H. for the State.

3. By means of the present writ petition, the
petitioner has put to challenge the FIR No.0182 of
2025 dated 19.06.2025, under Sections 21/29/8 of
N.D.P.S. Act, 1985 registered at Police Station Vikas
Nagar, District Dehradun.

4. It is contended by learned counsel for the
petitioner that the petitioner is not named in the FIR
and her name came up during investigation.

5. It was contended by learned counsel for the
petitioner that the petitioner is seriously ill and
therefore she be not arrested by the Police at least
for a period of four weeks’ from the date of filing of
the writ petition.

6. On previous occasion, State counsel was
directed to get instructions in the matter.

7. Today, on instructions, State counsel submits
that it is true that the petitioner was operated on her
uterus, but she has been discharged from the
hospital on 22.06.2025; therefore the prayer made
by learned counsel for the petitioner cannot be
granted.

8. Having heard learned counsel for the parties
and having perused the FIR, this Court is of the view
that the petitioner has been implicated, when name
of the petitioner has come up during investigation,
2025:UHC:6593
but she has been implicated for very serious offence.
Furthermore, from the instructions received by State
counsel, it has come to light that the petitioner is
having criminal history of similar kind of offence
under the N.D.P.S. Act, 1985.

9. Having considered the submission made by
learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the
State, this Court is not inclined to invoke its
inherent discretionary jurisdiction to protect the
rights of the petitioner

10. Accordingly, writ petition is dismissed.

(Pankaj Purohit, J.)
29.07.2025
SK
2025:UHC:6593



Source link