Dismissed¶10

Jeewan Chandra Pandey v. State of Uttarakhand

Uttarakhand HC7 Mar 2025WPCRL/92/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Second writ petition on same cause of action — maintainability; protection from arrest and coercive measures in relation to FIR; FIR No.0485 of 2024 dated 27.09.2024 u/s 316(2), 318(4), 336(3), 338, 340(2) B.N.S., P.S. Rudrapur, District U.S. Nagar; earlier WPCRL No.1113 of 2024 against same FIR dismissed in limine on 15.10.2024; Abdul Razak v. State of Karnataka, 2017 SCC Online Kar 2855 (Full Bench, Karnatak High Court) distinguished as relating to habeas corpus/detention-order context; no other ground argued; dismissal at threshold; Pankaj Purohit, J.; 07.03.2025.

What did the court decide?

The Full Bench authority relied upon by the petitioner (Abdul Razak v. State of Karnataka) relates to habeas corpus petitions, where a second writ petition assailing the same detention order is maintainable only on fresh or new grounds that were not available when the first writ petition was filed.

SL. No.

Date

Office Notes,
reports, orders
or proceedings
or directions
and Registrar’s
order with

COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS

Signatures

WPCRL No.92 of 2025
Hon’ble Pankaj Purohit, J.
Mr. Govind S. Latwal, learned counsel for the
petitioner.
2.
Mr. Bhaskar C. Joshi, learned AGA with Ms. Sweta
Dobhal, learned B.H. for the State.

3.
Mr.
Siddhartha
Sah,
learned
counsel
for
respondent –Bank.

4.
By means of this writ petition, petitioner has
prayed for directing respondent nos.1 and 2 not to
arrest the petitioner and not to adopt any coercive
measures against him in relation to FIR dated
27.09.2024 in relation to Case Crime/FIR No.0485 of
2024 u/s 316(2), 318(4), 336(3), 338 and 340(2) of
B.N.S. registered at P.S. Rudrapur, District U.S. Nagar
lodged by respondent no.3.
5.
A preliminary objection has been raised in the
matter by learned Counsel for respondent-Bank that
earlier, WPCRL No.1113 of 2024 was filed before this
Court very Court assailing the selfsame FIR which is
under challenge in this petition. The said petition was
dismissed_in limine_vide judgment dated 15.10.2024.
Now, the petitioner seeks protection from being arrested
in relation to the said FIR, though on different grounds.
6.
Learned Counsel for the petitioner was asked to
show any case law under which a second writ petition
on the same cause of action is maintainable. He has
relied upon a Full Bench Judgment rendered by the
Karnatak High Court in the case of ‘Abdul Razak v. State
of Karnataka’ reported in2017 SCC Online Kar 2855
.
7.
Having gone through the aforesaid authority, this
Court finds that the said judgment relates to a habeas

corpus petition, wherein, it was held out that a second writ petition, assailing the same detention order based on fresh or new grounds, that were not available when the first writ petition was filed, is maintainable.
8. Here, the facts of the present case are quite
different. Hence the judgment relied upon by learned
Counsel for the petitioner is distinguishable. The same thus, cannot come in rescue of the petitioner.
9. No other legal ground was argued.
10. The petition fails and the same is dismissed at the threshold itself.
11. Pending application if any stands disposed of accordingly. (Pankaj Purohit, J.) 07.03.2025 R.Dang

corpus petition, wherein, it was held out that a second
writ petition, assailing the same detention order based
on fresh or new grounds, that were not available when
the first writ petition was filed, is maintainable.

8.
Here, the facts of the present case are quite

different. Hence the judgment relied upon by learned

Counsel for the petitioner is distinguishable. The same
thus, cannot come in rescue of the petitioner.

9.
No other legal ground was argued.

10. The petition fails and the same is dismissed at the
threshold itself.

11. Pending application if any stands disposed of
accordingly.
(Pankaj Purohit, J.)
07.03.2025
R.Dang

Jeewan Chandra Pandey v. State of Uttarakhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jeewan Chandra Pandey v. State of Uttarakhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Anil Rastogi Vs State of Uttarakhand

Sanjay Kumar Vs State of Uttarakhand

Rajendra Kumar Vs State of Uttarakhand

Prem Rathor Vs State of Uttarakhand

Kanhaiya Bisht Vs State of Uttarakhand

Deepak Kumar Singh Vs Smt.Jyoti Singh