2025:UHC:1897-DB 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI G. NARENDAR AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE ALOK MAHRA WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) NO. 701 OF 2023 19TH MARCH, 2025 Apoorva Joshi …… Petitioner Versus State of Uttarakhand & others …… Respondents Counsel for the petitioner : Mr. Dushyant Mainali, learned counsel Counsel for the respondents : Mr. J.S. Virk, learned Deputy Advocate General with Mr. Rakesh Kumar Joshi, learned Brief Holder for the State / respondent Nos. 1 to 3 : Mr. M.S. Pal, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. Sachin, learned counsel for respondent No. 4 The Court made the following: JUDGMENT: (per Hon’ble The Chief Justice Sri G. Narendar) Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner Mr. Dushyant Mainali; learned Deputy Advocate General for the State of Uttarakhand Mr. J.S. Virk; and the learned 2025:UHC:1897-DB 2 Senior Counsel Mr. M.S. Pal appearing for the fourth respondent, along with Mr. Sachin, learned counsel. 2) The case of the petitioner is that he is an investigating journalist and has explored many scams, and one of them was the encroachment of land by the fourth respondent, and that the investigation reported by the petitioner led to the Government initiating action and restoring the land under the illegal possession of the fourth respondent, and that on filing of the writ petition, the Government has assigned one PSO, as and when, the petitioner visits his home district of Almora. 3) Per contra, learned Deputy Advocate General would submit that the petitioner is a resident of Uttar Pradesh, and that it is not possible for the State of Uttarakhand to provide security in the neighboring State of Uttar Pradesh, and that whenever the petitioner visits Uttarakhand, the local police have been assigning a PSO, who accompanies him till he remains in Uttarakhand. 4) In that view, we are of the considered opinion that the relief prayed having been granted, the writ petition does not survive for further orders. 2025:UHC:1897-DB 3 5) Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of placing on record the submissions made by learned Deputy Advocate General for the State of Uttarakhand. 6) It is made clear that the disposal of the writ petition is not a commentary on the allegations leveled against the fourth respondent. ________________ G. NARENDAR, C.J. ____________ ALOK MAHRA, J. Dt: 19TH MARCH, 2025 Negi HIMANS HU NEGI Digitally signed by HIMANSHU NEGI DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=bb3b60774012c1ef1dae20d13aaf 116e73351fdaf6878326386908a7f90d5757, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=75BD9D0FB7F4A80990FC51 A722A6BC552D470EB4FD2F88DDF7C18DB 2A1524A4D, cn=HIMANSHU NEGI Date: 2025.03.24 10:53:03 +05'30'