Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Uttarakhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 4007 (UTT)

AMIT KUMAR v. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

WPCRL/17/2026 · 2026-01-06

Ashish Naithani

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2026:UHC:204 SL. No. Dat e Office Not es, r eport s, or ders or pr oceedin gs or dir ect ion s and Regist rar ’s or der w it h Sign at u res COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS WPCRL No.17 of 2026 Hon ’ble Ash ish Nait h an i, J. Mr. Aakash Sanyal, learned counsel for the Petitioners. 2. Mrs. Pushpa Bhatt, learned D.A.G. assisted by Mr. Bhaskar Chandra Joshi, learned A.G.A. and Mr. Vijay Khanduri, learned Brief Holder for the State. 3. The present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed by the Petitioners for quashing the impugned F.I.R. No.1223 of 2025 dated 05.12.2025 registered under Section 74 of BNS at Police Station Laksar, District Haridwar and further to direct the Respondent no.1 to not to take any coercive action against the Petitioners in pursuance to the abovementioned FIR. 4. During the arguments, the learned counsel for the Petitioners submits that this writ petition may be disposed of with a direction to the concerned Station House Officer to follow the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, passed in ‘Arnesh Kumar vs. State of Bihar and Another’, (2014) 8 SCC 273, before proceed to arrest the Petitioners. 5. Learned State counsel has no objection on the submissions made by the learned counsel for the Petitioners. 6. Having considered the submissions, this Court reminds the Investigating Officer concerned to adhere 2026:UHC:204 strictly to the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Arnesh Kumar (supra). The Investigating Officer shall abide by the requirements of Section 41 and 41A CrPC before effecting any arrest. 7. In view of the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the present writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the concerned Station House Officer to follow the guidelines formulated by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in ‘Arnesh Kumar vs. State of Bihar and Another’, (2014) 8 SCC 273. 8. It is directed that in the event of the petitioners’ co-operation in the investigation, the Investigating Officer of the case shall not arrest the Petitioners without satisfying himself regarding the necessity of arrest as per the mandate of Section 41 CrPC read with the guidelines in Arnesh Kumar (supra). 9. The Petitioners shall extend full co-operation in the investigation and shall appear before the Investigating Officer as and when called upon. (Ashish Naithani, J.) 06.01.2026 Akash AKASH Digitally signed by AKASH DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=dae2472c001d56469ea76fc0caa68f48ef7351 8c148d140566ab1e26f9cbe61d, postalCode=263001, st=Uttarakhand, serialNumber=27096a1625377537a487dee49224c891 823fc6a0334628b21e516047ed4f22f7, cn=AKASH Date: 2026.01.07 13:23:53 +05'30'