Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Uttarakhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 9209 (UTT)

HIMANSHU AGARWAL v. RAJBEER SINGH RAWAT

C528/1621/2026 · 2026-07-29

Rakesh Thapliyal

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

UKHC010131292026 2026:UHC:6544 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS C528/1621/2026 Himanshu Agarwal --Applicant Versus Rajbeer Singh Rawat --Respondent Hon'ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J. 1. Mr. Bilal Ahmed, learned counsel for the applicant. 2. The instant petition is moved by the applicant challenging the proceeding initiated against him under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act on the ground that cheque in question regarding which the proceeding has been initiated under the N.I. Act, was, in fact, missing and despite the written complaint, FIR was not registered. Thereafter, he moved an application under Section 175(3) of BNSS 2023 and the same is pending for consideration. 3. The plea as taken in this petition is thoroughly misconceived and this is, in fact, a story cooked up by the applicant which is evident from the fact that with regard to missing of the cheque no FIR is registered. 4. In such view of the matter the instant C528 petition lacks merit and is dismissed. A liberty is being given to the applicant to file fresh C528 petition on other grounds except the plea of missing of cheque. (Rakesh Thapliyal,J.) 29.07.2026 Parul