IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Criminal Writ Petition No. 124 of 2009 Babloo Malik S/o Mahipal Singh ....... Petitioner Versus State of Uttarakhand and another ....... Respondents Mr. Ajay Veer Pundir, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Nandan Arya, A.G.A. for the State. Hon’ble J.C.S. Rawat, J. Mr. Ajay Veer Pundir, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Nandan Arya, A.G.A. for the respondents. 2. After due consideration of the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties; contents of the F.I.R.; the fact that the report of Tehsildar discloses that the petitioner has obtained forged resident certificate; the fact that the petitioner has obtained forged school certificate from Jwalapur; the fact that the petitioner got employment on the basis of these forged certificates; and in the facts and circumstances of the case, I do not find that the petitioner is entitled to get the reliefs claimed in the writ petition. 3. The writ petition, therefore, fails and is liable to be dismissed and is hereby dismissed in limine. 4. I am refraining from commenting on the merits of the case lest it may adversely affect the petitioner’s case at the trial, which is yet to start. 5. Consequently, the CLMA No. 1596 of 2009 also stands disposed of. (J.C.S. Rawat, J.) 04.03.2009 Shiv