2026:UHC:445 1 HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition Criminal No. 1624 of 2025 10 January, 2026 Santosh Iyer --Petitioner Versus State Of Uttarakhand & another --Respondents WITH Writ Petition Criminal No.1628 of 2025 M/S Mercedes Benz India Pvt. Ltd. --Petitioner Versus State Of Uttarakhand & another --Respondents ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Presence:- Mr. Anshuman Singh, Mr. Prabhakar Prakash and Ms. Gyanmati Kushwaha, learned counsel for the petitioner(s). Mr. G.C. Joshi, learned AGA along with Mr. Rakesh Negi, learned Brief Holder for the State. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Hon’ble Pankaj Purohit, J. By means of present writ petitions, petitioners have sought following reliefs: “(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned FIR No.71 of 2024 dated 28.01.2024, registered as Police Station Patel Nagar, District Dehradun, under Sections 120-B, 420, 467, 468 & 471 IPC and all proceedings arising therefrom (annexure no.1 to this writ petition). (ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 10.11.2025, passed by 2026:UHC:445 2 learned 2nd Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dehradun in Protest Petition/Misc. Case No.12 of 2024, whereby the Final Report dated 19.06.2024 has been rejected and further and complete investigation/re-investigation has been directed (annexure no.2 to this writ petition). (iii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of prohibition restraining the respondents from undertaking, continuing or acting upon any further investigation, enquiry or coercive proceedings in pursuance of the aforesaid FIR or the impugned order dated 10.11.2025.” 2. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioners that earlier WPCRL Nos. 646 of 2024 and 647 of 2024 were filed before this Court seeking quashing of the same FIR, which is also under challenge in the present writ petitions. Both the writ petitions were disposed of by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 27.06.2024, on the statement made by the learned State Counsel that, after investigation, a final report had already been filed in the aforesaid FIR; consequently, the writ petitions were dismissed as infructuous. 3. Subsequently, the complainant challenged the final report before the competent court by filing a protest petition, and in the said protest petition, cognizance was taken by the learned Magistrate, who further directed fresh investigation to be conducted in respect of the aforesaid FIR. 4. Instead of challenging the said order through appropriate judicial proceedings before the competent forum, the present writ petitions have been filed. In view of the aforesaid circumstances, the writ petitions are not maintainable. Accordingly, the same are dismissed in limine. 5. So far as the prayer for quashing the order dated 10.11.2025, passed by the learned 2nd Additional 2026:UHC:445 3 Chief Judicial Magistrate, whereby further investigation was directed, is concerned, the same cannot be gone into by this Court in writ petition. Accordingly, the said prayer is also rejected. 6. Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of. (Pankaj Purohit, J.) 10.01.2026 AK