Goldy Rajiv Santhoji VS State of Uttarakhand

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

RAVINDRA MAITHANI
Goldy Rajiv Santhoji – Appellant
Versus
State of Uttarakhand – Respondent

Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties:
In Criminal Misc. Application No.887/2020
For the Petitioners:Mr. Trideep Pai, Senior Advocate, assisted by Ms. Amritananda Chakrvarty and Mr. Abhijay Negi, Advocate
For the Respondent Nos.1, 2, 4 and 5:Mr. J.S. Virk, Deputy Advocate General with Mr. Lalit Miglani, AGA and Mr. Rohit Dhyani, Brief Holder
For the Respondent No.3:Mr. Rakesh Thapliyal, Senior Advocate, assisted by Mr. P.C. Petshali, Advocate
In Criminal Misc. Application No.31/2021
For the Petitioners:Mr. Rakesh Thapliyal, Senior Advocate, assisted by Mr. P.C. Petshali, Advocate
For the Respondent Nos.1, 2 and 3:Mr. J.S. Virk, Deputy Advocate General with Mr. Lalit Miglani, AGA and Mr. Rohit Dhyani, Brief Holder
For the Respondent No.4:Mr. Trideep Pai, Senior Advocate, assisted by Ms. Amritananda Chakrvarty and Mr. Abhijay Negi, Advocate

JUDGMENT

Ravindra Maithani, J.—Since, common question of law and facts are involved in both these petitions, [(filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (“the Code”)], they are being taken up together and decided by this common judgment.

2. In this judgment, parties shall be referred to as they are arrayed in Criminal Misc. Application No. 887 of 2020. Accordingly, Goldy Rajiv Santhoji shall be referred to as the petitioner and one of the victims, who is respondent no.3 in it shall be referred to as DD in order to mask his name. It may be noted that DD is petitioner in Criminal Misc. Application No. 31 of 2021.

Facts

3. A report was received by the Senior Superintendent of Police (for short “SSP”) Udham Singh Nagar, purportedly sent by the Parents Teachers’ Association(“PTA”) Beershiva Residential Senior Secondary School, Sirolikalan, Kitchha, District Udham Singh Nagar (For short, “the school”). According to it, the petitioner was the Manager of the School. He committed unnatural sex with the students and also told them not to reveal it to anyone under threat that in case it is revealed, he would fail them in the practical. There were other allegations as

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

RAVINDRA MAITHANIGoldy Rajiv Santhoji – AppellantVersusState of Uttarakhand – Respondent

Cases Referred (12)

RAVINDRA MAITHANI
Goldy Rajiv Santhoji – Appellant
Versus
State of Uttarakhand – Respondent