Uttarakhand High Court

WPCRL/1395/2026 of MUSKAAN WALIA Vs STATE OF UTTARAKHAND on 22 July 2026

Cites 1, Cited by 0

Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS UKHC010126622026 WPCRL/1395/2026 Muskaan Walia --Petitioner Versus State Of Uttarakhand --Respondent Hon’ble Alok Mahra, J. Mr. Pankaj Semwal,

Citations and Judicial Treatment

No citing decisions in the index yet

Cited by

0

Decisions in the index citing it

Cites

1

Decisions referred to

In this index

1

Of the decisions it cites

Overruled / Questioned

0

No negative treatment found

Loading the citing and cited decisions…

SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS

UKHC010126622026 WPCRL/1395/2026

Muskaan Walia --Petitioner Versus State Of Uttarakhand --Respondent

Hon’ble Alok Mahra, J.

Mr. Pankaj Semwal, Advocate for the petitioner.

2. Mr. N.S. Kanyal, A.G.A. for the State.

3. By means of the present writ petition, petitioner seeks quashing of FIR No. 184 of 2026, under Sections 406 of IPC, registered at Police Station-Ranipur, District Haridwar.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is wholly innocent and has falsely been implicated in the case; that the impugned F.I.R. has been lodged on false, fabricated and concocted allegations.

5. During the course of arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner submits the offences alleged in the impugned F.I.R. are punishable with imprisonment, which does not exceed seven years. Thus, the writ petition may be disposed of with a direction to the concerned Station House Officer to follow the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, passed in ‘Arnesh Kumar Vs. State of Bihar and Another’, reported in (2014) 8 SCC 273, before he proceeds to arrest the petitioner. It is further submitted that the petitioner

undertakes to cooperate with the investigation in all respects and shall appear before the Investigating Officer as and when required.

6. Learned State Counsel has no objection on the above submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner.

7. In view of the above, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the Station House Officer, Police Station–Ranipur, District Haridwar and the Investigating Officer to follow the guidelines formulated by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in ‘Arnesh Kumar vs. State of Bihar and Another’, reported in (2014) 8 SCC 273.

8. 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.

9. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of accordingly.

(Alok Mahra J.)

22.07.2026 Ujjwal

You have used today's free searches. Sign in, for free, to keep searching without a limit.

Compass reads the judgments for you and finds the paragraphs for and against your question. Sign in to use it.

My Vault follows judgments for you and records every later decision that cites them. Sign in to keep one.

Sign in to download the court's PDF. The full text stays free to read here.

Sign in, for free, to download the court copy. Reading the full text here stays open to everyone.

Search and read Indian judgments without limits, save them to My Vault and find the relevant paragraphs with Compass.

Open the sign-in page instead