MOHD. MUSTAKIM ALIAS MNEER AHMAD v. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND
WPCRL/2240/2020 · 2025-06-12
Pankaj Purohit
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 11105 (UTT) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 11105 (UTT) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s
order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS
WPCRL No.2240 of 2020 Hon’ble Pankaj Purohit, J.
Mr. Lalit Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioners.
2. Mr. S.S. Chauhan, learned Dy.A.G. for the State.
3. None for the private respondent(s).
4.
Learned Counsel for the State on instructions submits that after investigation, charge-sheet has been submitted against all the petitioners on
18.02.2021. The instructions are taken on record.
5. This fact is not disputed by learned counsel for petitioners who submits that he would challenge the charge sheet before the appropriate forum under the law.
6. In view of the statement made, the writ petition is dismissed as infructuous. However, it is open to the petitioners to challenge the charge sheet before the appropriate forum.
(Pankaj Purohit, J.)
12.06.2025 R.Dang