Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Uttarakhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 4171 (UTT)

VANDANA ARYA AND ORS v. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

WPCRL/102/2026 · 2026-01-10

Pankaj Purohit

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

SL. No. Dat e Of f ice Not es, report s, or ders or proceedin gs or direct ion s an d Regist rar’s order w it h Sign at u res COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS WPCRL No.102 of 2026 Hon’ble Pankaj Purohit, J. Ms. Snigdha Tiwari and Mr. Abhijay Negi, learned counsel for the petitioners. 2. Mr. B.C. Joshi, learned AGA for the State. 3. By means of this writ petition, petitioners have impugned the FIR No.0426 of 2025 dated 22.12.2025, lodged under Sections 120-B and 420 IPC, registered at P.S. Ram Nagar, District Nainital. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners has limited his argument to the extent that the investigation agency should comply with the guidelines given in Arnesh Kumar Vs. State of Bihar and another reported in (2014) 8 SCC 273. 5. Since the aforesaid offences carry a punishment maximum to seven years, therefore before resorting to any arrest, prior notice under Section 35(3) of the B.N.S.S., 2023 (under Section 41A of Cr.P.C.) is necessary to be issued to the petitioners. Hence, it is provided that before taking any coercive measures against the petitioners, the Investigating Officer shall abide by procedure given under Section 35(3) of the BNSS Act, 2023 (under Section 41A of Cr.P.C.) 6. Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of. 7. Pending application, if any, stands disposed of accordingly. (Pankaj Purohit, J.) 10.01.2026 AK