2025:UHC:2590 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.288 of 2025 Hon’ble Pankaj Purohit, J. Mr. Dharmendra Barthwal, learned counsel for petitioner. 2. Mr. S.C. Dumka, learned D.A.G. with Ms. Sweta Badola Dobhal, learned Brief Holders for State of Uttarakhand. 3. Mr. Piyush Garg, learned counsel undertakes to file his Vakalatnama on behalf of respondent No.3 during the course of day. 4. By means of the present criminal writ petition, petitioner has challenged the FIR No.61 of 2025 dated 30.03.2025, under Sections 406 and 420 IPC, registered with Police Station Prem Nagar, District Dehradun. 5. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that after hearing both the parties, Director of Medical Education, Dehradun, has returned a sum of Rs. Two Crore, which was entrusted by the original trust namely Sri Sri 1008 Narayan Swami Charitable Trust, Dehradun, in favour of the petitioner, who was earlier the trustee of the aforesaid trust. 6. It is further submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that it was agreed that the money will be returned in favour of the Trust who has entrusted it and it was also agreed between the earlier Trust and the newly created Trust. 7. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.3 submitted admittedly that the petitioner was a trustee in Sri Sri 1008 Narayan Swami Charitable Trust, Dehradun. 2025:UHC:2590 On 23.09.2011, he resigned from the Trust. The name of the trustee was changed to Dr. Jagat Narayan Subharti Charitable Trust and it was later on merged into the MTV Buddhist and Religious Charitable Trust. 8. It is contended by learned counsel for the respondent No.3 that once the petitioner has resigned from the Trusteeship of the earlier Trust, the money cannot be received by him in a personal capacity. 9. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, this Court is of the view that the petitioner is not entitled to get any discretionary relief from this Court, as prima- facie cognizable offence is made out against him for the FIR impugned. 10. Accordingly, the present criminal writ petition fails and is accordingly dismissed in- limine. 11. Pending application, if any, also stands disposed of. (Pankaj Purohit, J.) 07.04.2025 PN