Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Uttarakhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 2223 (UTT)

NAVNEET KAUR v. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

WPCRL/508/2026 · 2026-03-20

Rakesh Thapliyal

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2026:UHC:2010 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS WPCRL/508/2026 Hon'ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J. 1. Mr. Yogesh Upadhyay, learned counsel with Mr. Kaushal Sah Jagati, learned counsel for the petitioners. 2. Ms. Sweta Badola Dobhal, learned Brief Holder for the State. 3. By the instant writ petition, the petitioners are praying for the following reliefs:- (i) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the FIR dated 13.03.2026 registered as FIR No. 70 of 2026 P.S. Khatima District U.S. Nagar, U/s 420 IPC, 351(2), 352 BNS (Annexure-1) (ii) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing/commanding the respondent nos. 1 and 2 not to arrest the petitioners till the pendency of the present writ petition. 4. It is argued by the learned counsel for the petitioners that all the offences in which the petitioners have been implicated are punishable for less than seven years, but still there is apprehension of arrest since they have not received any such notice under Section 35(3) of BNSS 2023. He submits that the concerned I.O. while conducting the investigation has to follow the guidelines as formulated by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Arnesh Kumar vs. State of Bihar, (2014) 8 SCC 272 while conducting the investigation. 5. Mr. Sweta Dobhal, learned Brief Holder for the State have not disputed that all the offences are punishable for less than seven years, therefore, the I.O. has to follow the guidelines as formulated by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Arnesh Kumar (supra). 2026:UHC:2010 6. In view of the submissions, as advanced above, and with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties, the instant writ petition is disposed of finally with the direction to the concerned I.O. to follow the guidelines as formulated by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Arnesh Kumar (supra) while conducting the investigation and issue notice under Section 35(3) of BNSS as and when it requires. 7. Pending application, if any, also stand disposed of. (Rakesh Thapliyal, J.) 20.03.2026 Parul 2026:UHC:2010