Uttarakhand High Court
WPCRL/977/2026 of SANJAY KUMAR Vs STATE OF UTTARAKHAND on 5 August 2026
SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS WPCRL/977/2026 Sanjay Kumar --Petitioner Versus State Of Uttarakhand --Respondent Hon'ble Alok Mahra, J. Mr. C.S. Dalakoti proxy counsel
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS
WPCRL/977/2026
Sanjay Kumar --Petitioner Versus State Of Uttarakhand --Respondent Hon'ble Alok Mahra, J.
Mr. C.S. Dalakoti proxy counsel for Mr. Ravindra S. Rawat, learned counsel for the petitioner.
2. Mr. Shailendra Singh Chauhan, learned Deputy A.G. along with Mr. Vikash Uniyal, learned Brief Holder for the State.
3. By means of the present writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed for issuance of a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding respondent nos. 1 and 2 to ensure protection of the petitioner's life and personal liberty. The petitioner has further sought a direction restraining respondent nos. 3 to 5, either directly or through their associates, from extending any threat, harassment or interference with the petitioner's peaceful possession of his property or otherwise causing any harm to him, in accordance with law.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner had purchased a vacant plot by means of a registered sale deed dated 15.11.2022
and has been in peaceful possession thereof since the date of purchase; that, that whenever the petitioner attempts to raise construction over the said plot, respondent nos. 3 to 5 obstruct the construction work, abuse and intimidate him, and allegedly threaten to implicate him in a false criminal case relating to molestation; that, apprehending danger to his life and property, the petitioner submitted a complaint before the Senior Superintendent of Police, Haridwar.
5. Learned counsel would further submit that on 24.04.2026, respondent nos. 3 to 5 allegedly assaulted the petitioner, whereafter an F.I.R. was lodged against them; that despite, registration of the F.I.R., respondent nos. 3 to 5 have been continuously threatening the petitioner with dire consequences and pressurising him to compromise the criminal case, failing which they have allegedly threatened to kill him; that, on these premises, it is argued that the petitioner has a genuine apprehension regarding his life and property; that, pursuant to the order passed by this Court on the previous date of hearing, the State was directed to obtain instructions regarding the threat perception of the petitioner.
6. Learned State counsel, on the basis of written instructions received from the Station House Officer of the concerned Police Station, submits that the petitioner's threat perception has been duly assessed and upon such assessment, it has been found that, as on date, there is no imminent threat to the life or property of the petitioner from respondent nos. 3 to 5.
7. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.
8. Having considered the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and the instructions received by the learned State counsel, this Court finds that the competent police authority, after assessing the petitioner's threat perception, has reported that there is presently no threat to the life or property of the petitioner from respondent nos. 3 to 5. However, it is observed that in the event any fresh cause of action arises or the petitioner faces any imminent threat to his life, liberty or property, it shall be open to the petitioner to approach the jurisdictional police authorities by making an appropriate representation. In such an eventuality, the concerned police authorities shall examine the grievance and take appropriate action strictly in accordance with law.
9. With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition stands disposed of.
10. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of accordingly.
(Alok Mahra, J.)
05.08.2026 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=6a812005bebfcf46f244f3e584af1449e430ef900 bf09a6d67ebbd642671329b, postalCode=263001, st=Uttarakhand, serialNumber=5de1751a4f1d9cabfd54852c9e68911ca8 b66dd26690a191648ab5d8dd004ef0, cn=MAMTA RANI Date: 2026.08.05 17:46:07 +05'30'