MURLIDHAR PUROHIT Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By means of present writ petition, the petitioners seek the following reliefs, among others:

(2.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned counsel for the State, perused the documents brought on record and considered the grounds taken up in the writ petition.

(3.) An F.I.R was lodged by Deputy Director of the Sanctuary against unknown accused. The allegation is that somebody made manipulations in the cash-book to incorporate the name of one Harsh Pati Purohit. It is the submission of learned counsel for the petitioners that consequent upon the departmental enquiry, the petitioner No. 1 was exonerated. The regularization of the petitioner No. 2 was cancelled which was challenged by him before this Court in a writ petition. The said writ petition was allowed and a liberty was granted to the department to hold a departmental enquiry. After the departmental inquiry, the services of petitioner No. 2 were done away with against which he again filed a writ petition, which is pending adjudication. Present criminal proceedings have been initiated only after that. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submitted that the petitioners are ready to cooperate with the investigating agency during interrogation and investigation.