| |
CDJ 2026 Utt HC 110
|
| Court : High Court of Uttarakhand |
| Case No : WPCRL. No. 2019 of 2026 |
| Judges: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK MAHRA |
| Parties : Kuttu Kumar Versus State Of Uttarakhand |
| Appearing Advocates : For the Petitioner: Ankur Sharma, learned counsel. For the Respondent: Pradeep Lohani, learned A.G.A. |
| Date of Judgment : 01-10-2026 |
| Head Note :- |
Constitution of India - Article 226 -
|
| Summary :- |
1. Statutes / Acts / Rules Mentioned:
- Article 226 of the Constitution of India
- Sections 318(4), 351(3) and 352 of the B.N.S.
2. Catch Words:
- Certiorari
- Mandamus
- Jurisdiction
- Civil dispute
- Criminal proceedings
- Stay
3. Summary:
The petitioner seeks quashing of FIR No. 0144 of 2026 and a mandamus directing that he not be arrested, alleging false implication arising from a civil dispute over an unregistered agreement to sell land. He contends that the FIR was lodged at an incorrect police station, lacking territorial jurisdiction. The court observes that the matter appears to stem from a civil dispute and notes the jurisdictional objection for investigation. Without passing on merits, the court issues an interim direction that the petitioner shall not be arrested pending further hearing, subject to his cooperation with the investigation. The stay application is disposed of, and the matter is listed for further proceedings.
4. Conclusion:
Petition Allowed |
| Judgment :- |
|
1. Mr. Mr. Ankur Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner.
2. Mr. Pradeep Lohani, learned A.G.A. 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 certiorari for quashing the First Information Report/Case Crime No. 0144 of 2026 dated 22.09.2026 registered at Police Station Selaqui, District Dehradun, for the offences punishable under Sections 318(4), 351(3) and 352 of the B.N.S.. The petitioner has further prayed for issuance of a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent authorities not to arrest the petitioner pursuant to the aforesaid F.I.R.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case; that, a registered agreement to sell was executed between the petitioner, the co-sharer and respondent no.3 in respect of land measuring 0.0345 hectare, situated at Village Sherpur, Tehsil Vikasnagar, Pachwadun; that, as per the terms of the agreement to sell, the sale deed was to be executed on or before 30.04.2025; however, despite repeated requests and reminders made by the petitioner, the complainant has neither shown his readiness and willingness to execute the sale deed nor paid the remaining sale consideration due from him, and consequently, the sale deed has not been executed and the impugned F.I.R. has been lodged on false and fabricated allegations only to exert undue pressure upon the petitioner in relation to the aforesaid civil dispute.
5. He would further submit that, even if the allegations contained in the impugned F.I.R. are taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety, the essential ingredients of the alleged offences are not made out against the petitioner; that, the allegations essentially arise out of a dispute relating to an agreement to sell and pertain to the performance of contractual obligations between the parties. Thus, the dispute is essentially civil in nature and the criminal proceedings have been initiated merely with a view to give a criminal colour to a civil dispute.
6. He would further submit that the impugned F.I.R. has been registered at Police Station Selaqui, whereas both the petitioner and the informant are residents of Village Sherpur, which falls within the territorial jurisdiction of Police Station Sahaspur; that, the land in question is also situated within the territorial jurisdiction of Police Station Sahaspur, therefore, according to learned counsel, Police Station Selaqui had no territorial jurisdiction in respect of the alleged occurrence and the registration of the impugned F.I.R. suffers from a jurisdictional infirmity.
7. Issue notice to respondent no.3, returnable at an early date.
8. Steps be taken within one week.
9. List the matter after receipt of the service report.
10. Counter affidavit shall be filed by the State/respondents.
11. Having considered the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner and upon perusal of the material available on record, prima facie, it appears that the dispute between the parties arises primarily out of an unregistered agreement to sell in respect of the property in question and relates to the execution of the sale deed and payment of the balance sale consideration. The nature of the allegations, at this stage, appears to have its genesis in a civil dispute between the parties. So far as the objection regarding territorial jurisdiction of Police Station Selaqui is concerned, the investigating agency is required to examine the said aspect.
12. In the aforesaid facts and circumstances, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, as an interim measure, it is directed that, till the next date of listing, the petitioner shall not be arrested in connection with First Information Report/Case Crime No. 0144 of 2026 dated 22.09.2026 registered at Police Station Selaqui, District Dehradun, subject to the condition that the petitioner shall cooperate with the investigation.
13. Stay application stands disposed of accordingly.
|
| |
