Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Uttarakhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 6814 (UTT)

RAM PRASAD v. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

WPCRL/215/2025 · 2026-06-12

Alok Mahra

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2026:UHC:4742 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.215 of 2025 Hon’ble Alok Mahra, J. Mr. Yogesh Upadhyay, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Dinesh Chauhan, A.G.A. for the State of Uttarakhand. Mr. Piyush Garg, Advocate for respondent no.6. 2. The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking a direction for transfer of investigation of the case in question from the local police to the Central Bureau of Investigation (C.B.I.) for conducting a fair, independent and impartial investigation. 3. Learned State Counsel, on instructions, submitted that during the pendency of the writ petition, the investigation has been concluded and a charge-sheet has already been submitted before the competent Court. It is, therefore, contended that the relief sought in the writ petition no longer survives and the petition has become infructuous. 4. Having considered the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and upon perusal of the material available on record, this Court finds that the petitioner has failed to place any cogent material demonstrating that the investigation conducted by the local police was tainted by mala fides, bias, arbitrariness or any circumstance warranting transfer of investigation to an independent agency such as the C.B.I. 2026:UHC:4742 Furthermore, since the investigation has culminated in submission of the charge- sheet, the principal relief sought in the writ petition cannot now be granted. 5. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as having become infructuous. However, it is made clear that dismissal of the present writ petition shall not preclude the petitioner from availing such remedies as may be available under law. The petitioner shall be at liberty to move an appropriate application before the jurisdictional Magistrate seeking further investigation or any other relief permissible in law, which shall be considered and decided on its own merits in accordance with law. (Alok Mahra, J.) 12.06.2026 Arpan