RAJ SINGH ALIAS RAJU SINGH v. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND
WPCRL/920/2024 · 2025-03-10
Pankaj Purohit
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 10306 (UTT) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 10306 (UTT) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
2025:UHC:1643 SL. No Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGES’S ORDERS
WPCRL No.920 of 2024 Hon’ble Pankaj Purohit, J.
Mr. Yogesh Upadhyay, learned counsel for petitioner, is present.
2. Mr. Kuldeep S. Rawal and Mr. Bhaskar Chandra Joshi, learned A.G.A. with Mr. Vipul Painuli and Ms. Sweta Dobhal, learned Brief Holders for the State of Uttarakhand, are present.
3. By means of the present criminal writ petition, petitioner has put to challenge the order/notice dated 02.07.2024 passed by the District Magistrate, Udham Singh Nagar, under Section 2/3 of the U.P. Control of Goondas Act, 1970 (hereinafter to be referred to as the Act).
4. Since, the notice impugned in the present writ petition is nothing but a show-cause notice to the petitioner to show as to why the provisions of the Act be not invoked upon him.
5. Learned State Counsel was directed to seek instruction in the matter as to what has happened to the explanation offered by the petitioner.
6. Today, learned State Counsel, on instruction, submits that the explanation of the petitioner is considered and the matter is listed for final hearing on 19.03.2025.
7. In view of the statement made by learned State Counsel, nothing remains to be decided in the present criminal writ petition as it is pre- mature.
8. Accordingly, the present criminal writ petition is dismissed as pre-mature.
9. Pending application, if any, also stands disposed of.
(Pankaj Purohit, J.)
10.03.2025 PN