SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS C482 No.1714 of 2019 Hon’ble Alok Mahra, J. Mr. M.S. Pal, Senior Advocate, assisted by Ms. Amreen Bano, Advocate, holding brief of Mr. Sachin, Advocate for the applicants. Mr. Rakesh Kumar Joshi, A.G.A. for the State of Uttarakhand. 2. Present C-528 application is filed with the prayer to set-aside/quash the charge sheet dated 06.07.2019, summoning order dated 20.08.2019 and the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.134 of 2019, pending in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate, Garur, Bageshwar. 3. An F.I.R. was lodged on 11.01.2019 by the Assistant Mining Officer, Bageshwar, alleging therein that a checking team intercepted four trucks laden with River Bed Material (RBM). Upon inspection, the E-Rawanna’s produced by the drivers were found to be forged. It is further alleged that, on the basis of purported statements of the drivers, the RBM had been loaded from the stone crusher of applicant no.1, and that the alleged forged E-Rawanna had been issued by applicant no.2, who is stated to be the manager of applicant no.1. 4. Learned Senior Counsel for the applicants submits that the entire prosecution story is fundamentally misconceived and rests on no legally admissible or credible evidence. The F.I.R. itself has been lodged by the Assistant Mining Officer, who was neither a member of the raiding/checking team nor present at the spot of interception or recovery. Thus, the foundational facts are based on secondary information and not on any direct knowledge. It is further submitted that the applicants have been implicated solely on the basis of alleged confessional statements of the drivers of the intercepted trucks. It is a settled position of law that confessional statements of co-accused, particularly made to departmental authorities, have limited evidentiary value and cannot, by themselves, form the sole basis for fastening criminal liability upon third parties, in the absence of independent corroboration. He submits that there is no material on record to establish even prima facie that the alleged forged E- Rawanna were generated from the portal of applicant no.1 or that applicant no.2 had any role in their issuance. The prosecution has failed to place any electronic record, server data, login credentials, or audit trail to link the alleged documents with the applicants. He submits the drivers of the vehicles have already admitted their own involvement and have paid the penalty in respect of the RBM transportation, thereby clearly indicating that the liability, if any, stands admitted and exhausted qua them. However, the same cannot be mechanically extended to the applicants in the absence of cogent material establishing conspiracy, abetment, or conscious involvement. He submits that the entire prosecution is based on presumptions and assumptions without there being any prima facie material disclosing the essential ingredients of the alleged offence against the applicants. Continuation of criminal proceedings in such circumstances would amount to an abuse of the process of law and would result in unnecessary harassment to the applicants. 5. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. The prosecution case is not supported by any direct, cogent or admissible evidence linking the applicants with the alleged offence. The F.I.R. is admittedly lodged by an officer who was neither present at the spot nor part of the checking team, rendering the foundational facts hearsay in nature. The alleged involvement of the applicants is based solely on statements of drivers, which are uncorroborated and insufficient to establish criminal liability. No electronic evidence, such as server logs, portal access data, or audit trail, has been produced to show issuance of forged E-Rawanna by the applicants. There is no material indicating conspiracy, abetment, or mens rea. Continuation of proceedings would therefore amount to abuse of process of law and unnecessary harassment. In absence of prima facie case, the impugned charge sheet and proceedings are liable to be quashed. 6. Accordingly, the criminal misc. application is allowed and the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.134 of 2019, pending in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate, Garur, Bageshwar are hereby quashed. (Alok Mahra, J.) 30.05.2026 Arpan ARPAN JAISWAL Digitally signed by ARPAN JAISWAL DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=eabb68a3895e41937c266c23964c0485365445e3a20dddb739 3398f9fe45ba3e, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=060FC17022BEAE3DE215D68D9D454C5109CB9874463 51E4DF04AADAA2C2CEA66, cn=ARPAN JAISWAL Date: 2026.06.01 14:39:17 +05'30'