Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Uttarakhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 6107 (UTT)

ASHISH KUMAR v. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

WPCRL/941/2026 · 2026-05-26

Rakesh Thapliyal

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2026:UHC:4151 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS WPCRL No. 941 of 2026 Hon’ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J. 1. Mr. Gaurav Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. Mrs. Meenakshi Sharma and Mr. Himanshu Sain, learned A.G.A. for the State. 3. By the instant petition the petitioner is praying for the following reliefs: i. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned First Information Report lodged by respondent no. 3 on 08.05.2026 registered as FIR No. 177 of 2026 for the offence punishable under section 318(4), 351(3), 352 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, Police Station SIDCUL, District Haridwar (contained as Annexure No. 1 to the writ petition), qua the petitioner. From page 14 to 21); ii. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus, directing the respondent no. 1 and 2 not to arrest the petitioner and not to take any coercive measure against the petitioner in pursuant to the First Information Report lodged by respondent no. 3 on 08.05.2026 registered as FIR No. 177 of 2026 for the offence punishable under section 318(4), 351(3), 352 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, Police Station SIDCUL, District Haridwar (contained as Annexure No. 1 to the writ petition), qua the petitioner. From page 14 to 21). 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the offences as alleged in the FIR against the petitioners are punishable for upto seven years, therefore, I.O. should follow the guidelines formulated by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Arnesh Kumar vs. State of Bihar (2014) 8 SCC 273. 5. Learned State counsel have no objection on this and also submits that the offences as alleged are punishable for upto seven years, therefore, the I.O. concerned is under legal obligation to follow the guidelines formulated in the case of Arnesh Kumar (supra). 6. In such view of the matter, the instant writ petition is disposed of finally with the direction to the I.O. concerned to follow the guidelines formulated by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Arnesh Kumar vs. State of Bihar (2014) 8 SCC 273 and issue 2026:UHC:4151 appropriate notices while conducting the investigation. (Rakesh Thapliyal, J.) 26.05.2026 PR