UKHC010094422026 2026:UHC:5102 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS WPCRL/1011/2026 Rajesh Singh Negi And Others ………..Petitioner Versus State Of Uttarakhand .…….Respondent Hon'ble Alok Mahra, J. Mr. J. C. Karnatak and Mr. Prasanna Karnatak, learned ocunsel for the petitioner. 2. Mr. Jai Prakash Kandpal, learned Brief Holder for the State. 3. Mr. Saurabh Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for respondent no.3. 4. By means of the present writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners seek issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the First Information Report/Case Crime No.0021 of 2026 dated 22.05.2026, registered under Sections 115(2), 191(2), 351(2) and 352 of the B.N.S. and Section 3(1)(r) & 3(1)(s) of the Scheduled Cates and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 at Police Station Bhimtal, District Naintal. The petitioners have also prayed for issuance of a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding respondent nos.1 and 2 not to arrest them in pursuance of the aforesaid F.I.R. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that respondent no.3 lodged UKHC010094422026 2026:UHC:5102 F.I.R. on the basis of false and concocted grounds; that, the complaint filed by respondent no.3 is counterblast to the complaint case filed by the petitioner no.3 against respondent no.3. He would further submit that even if the allegations contained in the impugned F.I.R. are accepted in their entirety, the offences alleged are punishable, do not entail imprisonment exceeding seven years. Learned counsel submits that the petitioners are ready and willing to cooperate with the investigation and shall appear before the Investigating Officer as and when required. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioners, placing reliance upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar, (2014) 8 SCC 273, submits that the offences alleged in the impugned F.I.R. are punishable with imprisonment which does not exceed seven years. Learned counsel for the petitioner, therefore, prays that the present criminal writ petition be disposed of in terms of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar, with a direction to the respondent authorities to comply with the statutory safeguards governing arrest and investigation. 7. Learned State Counsel would oppose the writ petition. However, he does not dispute the fact that the offences alleged in the impugned F.I.R. are punishable with imprisonment which does not exceed seven years. UKHC010094422026 2026:UHC:5102 8. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and upon perusal of the material brought on record, this Court is not inclined to enter into the merits of the allegations at this stage. However, it is not disputed that the offences alleged against the petitioner are punishable with imprisonment not exceeding seven years. 9. Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the present writ petition is disposed of with a direction that the Investigating Officer shall proceed with the investigation strictly in accordance with law as well as the guidelines and directions issued by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar, (2014) 8 SCC 273, before effecting the arrest of the petitioner 10. It is clarified that in the event the Investigating Officer forms an opinion that arrest of the petitioner is necessary, the statutory requirements prescribed under law shall be complied with in letter and spirit. 11. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of accordingly. (Alok Mahra, J.) 19.06.2026 Mamta MAMTA RANI Digitally signed by MAMTA RANI DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=6a812005bebfcf46f244f3e584af1449e430ef90 0bf09a6d67ebbd642671329b, postalCode=263001, st=Uttarakhand, serialNumber=5de1751a4f1d9cabfd54852c9e68911ca8 b66dd26690a191648ab5d8dd004ef0, cn=MAMTA RANI Date: 2026.06.19 16:41:49 +05'30'