Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Uttarakhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 4857 (UTT)

JYOTI RAWAT v. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

WPCRL/391/2026 · 2026-02-26

Rakesh Thapliyal

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

SL. No Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGES’S ORDERS WPCRL No. 391 of 2026 Hon’ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J. 1. Mr. Rishabh Bisht, learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. Mr. Sandeep Sharma, learned A.G.A. for the State. 3. By the instant petition the petitioners are praying for the following relief: “i. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent nos. 1 and 2 to provide protection to the petitioners from the respondent nos. 3 to 6 so that they can live peacefully. ii. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent nos. 1 and 2 to take immediate and strict legal action against the private respondent nos. 3 to 6 and any other individuals involved, for their illegal acts of harassment, criminal intimidation, trespass, assault, and attempts of forcible eviction, including registering an FIR under appropriate aforesaid offences..” 4. It is contended in the petition that there is a threat perception from respondent nos. 3 to 6 though all are their family members. The respondent no. 3 is the mother of the petitioner no. 2 and mother-in-law of petitioner no. 1. 5. Learned A.G.A. on instructions informs to this court that there is some property dispute in between the petitioner and respondent nos. 3 and 6 and, therefore, they have a civil remedy but certain video clips has been placed on record, which is in pendrive with regard to the incident in which the private respondents beaten all these petitioners. 6. If it is so, let all the petitioners may approach to the respondent no. 2-the S.H.O. of P.S. Patel Nagar, District Dehradun tomorrow at 10:00 AM and the concerned S.H.O. may go there with pendrive and call the respondent nos. 3 to 6 and interact with them and resolve their dispute amicably giving warning to the petitioner as well as respondent nos. 3 to 6 not to create any nuisance and if there is some property dispute they avail civil remedy. If the S.H.O. concerned assess that there is any threat perception then make necessary arrangement so that respondent nos. 3 to 6 may not cause any harm to these petitioners. 7. Subject to the observations and directions as above, the writ petition is disposed of finally. (Rakesh Thapliyal, J.) 26.02.2026 PR