Uttarakhand High Court
WPCRL/1201/2026 of MUKESH RANA Vs STATE OF UTTARAKHAND on 1 July 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/1201/2026 Mukesh Rana --Petitioner Versus State Of Uttarakhand and Others --Respondents Hon'ble Alok Mahra, J. Mr. Gaurav Singh,
Citations and Judicial Treatment
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…
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.
UKHC010111382026
2026:UHC:5214 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS
WPCRL/1201/2026 Mukesh Rana --Petitioner Versus State Of Uttarakhand and Others --Respondents Hon'ble Alok Mahra, J.
Mr. Gaurav Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Mr. Rakesh Kumar Joshi, learned A.G.A. for the State of Uttarakhand.
2. By means of the present writ petition, the petitioner seeks quashing of FIR No. 0230 of 2023, registered at Police Station SIDCUL, District Haridwar, for the offences punishable under Sections 115(2), 318(4), 351(3) and 352 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The petitioner has also prayed that no coercive measures be taken against him.
3. The FIR, in a nutshell, alleges that the petitioner introduced respondent no. 3 to the co- accused persons, namely, Shivakant Pathak and Smt. Kalpana Pathak, in connection with certain land situated at Village Salempur Mahdood, District Haridwar, and represented that the said land could be sold to respondent no. 3. It is further alleged that respondent no. 3 paid a sum of Rs. 14,00,000/- to the aforesaid co-accused persons and subsequently came to know that the land was recorded as Naveen Parti and that certain proceedings were pending before the Consolidation Authorities. It is further alleged that the sale deed was not executed, thereby causing wrongful loss to respondent no. 3 and inducing him to part with the aforesaid amount.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has not committed any offence and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that the present petitioner merely acted as a property adviser. Learned counsel further submitted that UKHC010111382026
2026:UHC:5214 even if the allegations contained in the impugned FIR are accepted in their entirety, the offences alleged are punishable with imprisonment not exceeding seven years. It is also submitted that the petitioner is ready and willing to cooperate with the investigation and shall appear before the Investigating Officer as and when required.
5. During the course of arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner confined his prayer and submitted that the writ petition may be disposed of with a direction to the concerned Station House Officer/Investigating Officer to adhere to the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Arnesh Kumar vs. State of Bihar and Another, reported in (2014) 8 SCC 273, before effecting the arrest of the petitioner, as the offences alleged are punishable with imprisonment of less than seven years.
6. Learned State Counsel has no objection if the writ petition is disposed of in terms of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Arnesh Kumar vs. State of Bihar and Another (supra).
7. 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 and shall comply with the guidelines and directions issued by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Arnesh Kumar vs. State of Bihar and Another, (2014) 8 SCC 273, before effecting the arrest of the petitioner.
8. It is clarified that if the Investigating Officer forms an opinion that the arrest of the petitioner is necessary, the statutory requirements prescribed under the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, and the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court shall be complied with in letter and spirit.
9. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of accordingly.
(Alok Mahra, J.) 01-07-2026 SB
SHIKSHA BINJOLA Digitally signed by SHIKSHA BINJOLA DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=3410ef86ae41ec9fbabcd5dba6b3a2c24b5aa08b09c12f21822fbd40bf639b1c, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=FD80A2D028949381C52796A542D7FF0A9BED00E67B5283D205F18FE29BDF5DD9, cn=SHIKSHA BINJOLA Date: 2026.07.01 16:02:40 +05'30'