WPCRL/743/2022
2023 Latest Caselaw 1007 UK

       IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
                  AT NAINITAL

                      SRI JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI, C.J.
                                  AND
                    SRI JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR VERMA, J.

17TH APRIL, 2023 WRIT PETITION (CRL) No. 743 OF 2022 Between:

Mohd. Yusuf and others. .......Petitioners

and

State of Uttarakhand and others. ....Respondents

Counsel for the petitioners : Mr. Ajay Veer Pundir, learned counsel.

Counsel for the respondent Nos. 1 : Mr. J.S. Virk, learned Deputy Advocate to 6. General with Mr. R.K. Joshi, learned Brief Holder for the State of Uttarakhand.

Upon hearing the learned Counsel, the Court made the following

JUDGMENT : (per Sri Vipin Sanghi, C.J.)

No counter affidavit has been filed by the

respondents.

2. The petitioners had preferred this petition to seek

a direction to the respondent-police authorities to provide

them adequate security and protection from respondent

Nos. 3, 5 & 7.

3. The grievance raised by the petitioners was that

the respondent-police authorities, namely respondent Nos. 4

& 5, who had no jurisdiction in the matter, since the

property in question is situated in District Haridwar, and

there is a civil dispute between the petitioner on the one hand and the private respondent on the other hand, the said

respondents were pressurizing the petitioners to favour

respondent No. 4. The petitioners also raised a grievance

that they were apprehending threat and coercion from

respondent Nos. 4, 5, 6 & 7.

5. On 26.04.2022, this Court directed respondent

Nos. 4 & 5 to refrain themselves from exceeding their

territorial jurisdiction and to pass any order or take any

coercive action against the petitioners in respect of any

matter related to the property situated in District Haridwar.

That order continues to operate till date.

6. Mr. Virk, learned Deputy Advocate General for the

State of Uttarakhand, states that respondent Nos. 4 to 6 are

no longer exercising any jurisdiction in the matter of the

dispute between the petitioners and respondent No. 7 in

relation to land falling in District Haridwar.

7. We take the statement on record. Respondent

Nos. 4 to 6 shall continue to refrain from taking any action

against the petitioners in relation to any dispute in relation

to the land falling in District Haridwar, and which does not

fall within their territorial jurisdiction.

8. We dispose of this petition with a direction to the

respondent authorities to make an assessment of the threat

perceived by the petitioners from respondent No. 7 and the

other authorities and to take steps to ensure their protection

in the manner it is considered necessary.

________________

VIPIN SANGHI, C.J.

___________________ ALOK KUMAR VERMA, J.

Dt: 17th April, 2023 Rathour