2025:UHC:4834-DB IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI G. NARENDAR AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE ALOK MAHRA 11th June, 2025 WRIT PETITION CRIMINAL No. 389 OF 2025 Kamal Prasad …Petitioner Versus State of Uttarakhand and Others …Respondents Presence:- Mr. B.M. Pingal, learned counsel for the petitioner. Mr. J.S. Virk, learned Deputy Advocate General for the State. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- JUDGMENT: (per Hon’ble The Chief Justice Sri G. Narendar) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Deputy Advocate General for the State. 2. Learned Deputy Advocate General would submit that the Police inquiry has revealed that the petitioner is residing in Dehradun Club and is holding several properties in Dehradun city; that there are several civil disputes relating to the properties and, in the instant case, the 4th respondent is the sister and there is a subsisting civil dispute between the petitioner and the 4th respondent; that therein, a Will, bequeathing the property, has been questioned. 1 2025:UHC:4834-DB 3. In that view, learned Deputy Advocate General would submit that there is no threat perception and that the inquiry does not reveal any threat to the life and limb of the petitioner, much less, from the respondents. 4. Per contra, learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that a complaint has been lodged and, on the basis of the complaint, the private respondents are harassing the petitioner. 5. If that be the case, then it is always open to the petitioner to approach concerned S.P. or S.S.P., and lodge a complaint against the officers, who are attempting to take law in their own hands. 6. With the above liberty, the writ petition stands rejected. 7. There shall be no order as to costs. _______________ G. NARENDAR, C.J. _______________ ALOK MAHRA, J. Dt: 11th June, 2025 UJJWAL 2