PRAMENDRA DOBAL vs STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2025 Supreme(UK) 47

HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
PRAMENDRA DOBAL – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF UTTARAKHAND – Respondent

Table of Content
1. limits of revisional court's jurisdiction. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. importance of section 164 statements in investigations. (Para 4 , 5)
3. procedural limitations on magistrate's power. (Para 6 , 7 , 8)
4. issues around adequacy of evidence and protest petitions. (Para 9 , 10)
5. scheduled court sessions for further proceedings. (Para 11 , 12)

JUDGMENT :

Rakesh Thapliyal, J.

1. Mr. Piyush Garg, learned counsel for the applicant, argued at length by placing reliance on various judgments of the Hon’ble Apex Court as well as of the Allahabad High Court and by placing reliance he argued that the revisional court exceeded its power and jurisdiction by taking cognizance on additional documents, which were never been part of the investigation. He submits that the Magistrate concerned while rejecting the protest petition considered all the materials collected by the Investigating Officer while submitting the final report; however, the revisional court by allowing the application under Section 391 of Cr.P.C. accepted the additional documents, which infact were not part of the investigation. He submits that the order allowing the application under Section 391 of Cr.P.C. was challenged