2026:UHC:4729 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.971 of 2026 Hon’ble Alok Mahra, J. Mr. Lalit Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. S.C. Dumka, A.G.A. and Mr. Manoj Bhatt, Brief Holder for the State of Uttarakhand. 2. This writ petition has been filed seeking a direction to respondent nos.2 and 3 to ensure protection of the life and personal liberty of the petitioner and his family members from the alleged threats and intimidation extended by respondent nos.4 to 7 and their associates. 3. It is submitted that a revenue suit for partition under Section 176 of the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act is pending adjudication before the Court of the learned Assistant Collector, First Class, Nainital, in respect of the ancestral property jointly owned by the petitioner and other co-sharers. It is further submitted that, by an interim order dated 07.05.2026, the learned Assistant Collector restrained the parties from transferring, alienating, damaging, forcibly occupying, handing over possession of, or otherwise altering the nature and character of the property in dispute. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, despite the aforesaid interim protection, respondent nos.4 and 5, who are the real brothers of the petitioner, in collusion with respondent nos.6 and 7, summoned the petitioner to 2026:UHC:4729 Police Station, Bhimtal and compelled him to execute an agreement, which was subsequently notarized on 16.05.2026. 5. Vide order dated 10.06.2026, this Court directed respondent nos.6 and 7 to remain personally present before the Court. In compliance thereof, respondent nos.6 and 7 are present today. The petitioner is also present in person. 6. Learned State Counsel, upon instructions, submits that respondent nos.4 and 5 had submitted a complaint before the Inspector General of Police, Kumaun Region. Pursuant to directions issued by the Inspector General, an enquiry was entrusted to the Circle Officer, Bhowali. In connection with the said enquiry, both the complainants and the petitioner were called to the police station, where discussions were held, culminating in the execution of the agreement, which was thereafter notarized at Nainital. 7. Having considered the submissions advanced and the material placed on record, this Court finds that respondent nos.6 and 7 were acting in pursuance of directions issued by their superior authorities during the course of an enquiry. At this stage, there is no cogent material on record to prima facie establish that the agreement dated 16.05.2026 was obtained by respondent nos.6 and 7 through force, coercion, undue influence, or intimidation. Consequently, no adverse finding is warranted against respondent nos.6 and 7 in the present proceedings. 8. However, considering that a partition suit concerning the subject property is admittedly pending before 2026:UHC:4729 the competent Revenue Court and an interim order operates therein, it is observed that disputes relating to title, possession, partition, or any ancillary civil rights over the property shall be adjudicated exclusively by the competent court in accordance with law. The police authorities shall refrain from interfering in the civil dispute between the parties except to the extent permissible under law for maintaining public order or investigating any cognizable offence. 9. It is further directed that, in the event any complaint relating to the disputed property is received in future, the petitioner shall not be unnecessarily summoned or harassed by the police authorities, and any action shall be taken strictly in accordance with law and with due regard to the pendency of the civil proceedings. 10. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the writ petition stands disposed of. (Alok Mahra, J.) 12.06.2026 Arpan