2026:UHC:352-DB SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS 08.01.2026 WPCRL No.54 of 2026 Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J. Hon’ble Subhash Upadhyay, J. (per: Hon’ble Justice Sri Manoj Kumar Tiwari) Mr. Arvind Vashistha, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. Aditya Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners. 2. Mr. K.S. Bora, learned Deputy A.G. with Mr. J.P. Kandpal, learned Brief Holder for the State. 3. Petitioner no.1 is Andhra-based Company and other petitioners are officers of the said Company. By means of this writ petition, petitioners have sought the following reliefs:- “(i) To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing immediate cessation of all threatening, coercive, extortionist calls, WhatsApp messages, emails and automated reminders being made by Respondent nos.3 and 4. (ii) To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing to respondent nos.1 and 2 to register an FIR on the basis of our complaints dated 25.09.2025 and 05.12.2025 and take necessary action under IPC and the IT Act. (iii) To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing to Respondent Nos.1 and 2 to provide police protection to the petitioners to safeguard them from any harassment, intimidation or unlawful coercion from Respondent Nos.3 and 4 or any recovery agents acting through them. (iv) To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing to Respondent No.1, 2 & 5 (TRAI) to take immediate regulatory and penal action against Respondent Nos.3 and 4 for misuse of telecom systems, illegal auto-dialers, threatening calls and digital harassment tool.” 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that 2026:UHC:352-DB respondent nos.3 and 4 are making phone calls and also sending emails and threatening the petitioners to cough up certain amount, which respondent nos.3 and 4 claim that petitioners owe that amount to respondent no.6. It is submitted by learned senior counsel that petitioners have approached the police authorities concerned, however, police authorities have not lodged any FIR so far. 5. Learned State Counsel, however, submits that perusal of the complaint made by the petitioners to the police authorities, even if taken on its face value, at best indicates that a non-cognizable offence is made out, therefore, there cannot be a direction to the police authorities to register an FIR. He further submits that, if petitioners have any grievance, then they can file a complaint under relevant provisions of B.N.S.S., 2023. 6. This Court finds substance in the submission made by learned State Counsel. 7. Bare perusal of the allegations made in the complaint made by petitioners indicates commission of a non-cognizable offence, thus, there cannot be a direction to the police to lodge an FIR. However, the writ petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioners to approach the Cyber Cell and also Telecom Regulatory Authority of India – respondent no.5, if so advised, by making a complaint. The complaint, if made by the petitioners, shall be dealt with as per law, within a reasonable time. (Subhash Upadhyay, J.) (Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.) 08.01.2026 08.01.2026 Rajni RAJINI GUSAI N Digitally signed by RAJINI GUSAIN DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=97cfa6e4cbd49c07b876d b48448ac3701a9ae475a2547e4b7 f1d9b1f17d01342, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=8D039BC77BD1A2 222B4DF4FC80D4557562F95BEBA 013F530616A158A0A878BD8, cn=RAJINI GUSAIN Date: 2026.01.10 10:47:57 +05'30'