[Cites 1, Cited by 0]
Uttarakhand High Court
WPCRL/119/2026 on 26 February, 2026
Author: Rakesh Thapliyal
Bench: Rakesh Thapliyal
SL. Office Notes,
No. Date reports,
orders or COURT'S OR JUDGE'S ORDERS
proceedings
or directions
and
Registrar's
order with
Signatures
WPCRL No. 119 of 2026
Hon'ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J.
1. Mr. D.K. Sharma, learned senior
counsel assisted by Mr. A.M. Shukla,
learned counsel counsel for the petitioner.
2. Mr. Sandeep Sharma, learned A.G.A.
for the State.
3. Mr. Sandeep Kothari, learned counsel
for the respondent.
2. Pursuant to the previous order
dated 18.02.2026, the concerned S.H.O.
submitted a report through Mr. Sharma,
learned A.G.A. for the State and on
perusal of the report it reveals that from
June 2024 to 13.01.2026 the respondent
no. 8Smt. Shalini Vashisth, W/o Yogesh
Vashisth R/o hotel Agastya running a
hotel by changing name from "Pushp" to
"Agastya In". The relevant extract of the
report is also being reproduced here in
as under:
leIkw.kZ tkap ls ik;k x;k fd mDr lEifr ij o"kZ 2000
ls lat; iz/kku mijksDr }kjk gksVy iq"i dk lapkyu fd;k tk
jgk Fkk ftlesa vkilh ikfjokfjd lEifr fookn ds dkj.k ek0
flfoy U;k;ky; gfj}kj esa Hkh okn nk;j gS tks orZeku esa ek0
U;k;ky; esa fopkjk/khu gSA Jherh 'kkfyuh of'k"B fuoklh&gksVy
vxLr; bZu vij jksM dksrokyh uxj gfj}kj }kjk twu&2024 ls
13-01-2026 rd gksVy iq"i dk uke cnydj gksVy vxLR; bZu
dk lapkyu ik;k x;k gSA
3. This petition was filed on
12.01.2026 wherein following reliefs has
been made:-
i. Issue a writ order or direction in the nature
of the mandamus commanding and directing
the official respondent no. 2 and 3 to provide
adequate security and protection to the
petitioners as provided under the law by
protecting their rights of life and personal
liberty with dignity and property as
guaranteed to them by the Constitution of
India under Article 21 being serious threat
perception to the life and liberty of the
petitioners as against the private respondent
no. 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 and their goons.
(ii) Issue a writ order or direction in the
nature of the mandamus commanding and
directing the official respondent no. 2 and 3 to
restore the possession of the petitioners
forthwith in respect to the property in
question.
4. As it appears from the relief (ii) the
petitioners are praying for restoration of
possession meaning thereby on the date
when the petition was filed the
petitioners not in possession.
5. In this petition on 13.01.2026, the
Vacation Judge granted protection to the
petitioner since the impression was given
that there is threat perception from
respondent nos. 4 to 8. The operative
part of the order passed by the Vacation
Judge is also being reproduced herein as
under:-
Considering the facts and circumstances
of the case, as an interim measure, it is
and 3 shall ensure that no harm is cause to
the petitioners and shall provide necessary
protection to the life, liberty and property of
the petitioners, in accordance with law, till the
next date of listing.
6. Now stay vacation application has
been moved by the respondent no. 8
contending therein that on 29.01.2026
the petitioners with the assistance of
some anti social elements i.e. about 40
to 50 persons entered in the premises of
property in question and took possession
forcibly regarding which an FIR was
lodged on 07.02.2026 at P.S. Kotwali,
District Haridwar bearing FIR No. 56 of
2026 wherein as many as 20 persons
have been implicated.
7. Mr. Sandeep Kothari, on the
previous date argued that, in fact, under
the garb of protection order passed by
the Coordinate Bench dated 13.01.2026,
the petitioners with 40 to 50 anti-social
elements took possession forcibly.
8. To examine this aspect who was in
possession as on date when the
protection was passed by the Vacation
Judge on 13.01.2026, the S.H.O.
concerned was directed on 18.02.2026
to depute police officials in the premises
of property in question and examine who
was in possession on or before the date
of passing of protection order dated
13.01.2026.
9. Pursuant to the order dated
18.02.2026, learned A.G.A placed before
this Court the report of S.H.O. This Court
peruse the report which reveals that on
or before 13.01.2026, respondent no. 8
was in possession.
10. After seeing the report, the S.S.P.
Haridwar was directed to join the
proceeding through V.C. today itself and
he joined the proceeding through V.C.
and apprise to this court that in respect
of the incident of 29.01.2026
investigation is going on.
11. Now report of the S.H.O. is on
record and the investigation in respect of
the incident dated 29.01.2026 is going
on, let the S.S.P. Haridwar may examine
the report of the S.H.O. as well as writ
petition, particularly, relief no. 2 and
further get status of the investigation of
FIR lodged on 29.01.2026 and then after
examining all the aspects submit a fresh
report on 11.03.2026.
12. Put up this matter on 11.03.2026
on top of the board.
12. Mr. Sandeep Kothari, learned
counsel apprise to this Court that the
petitioner with the assistance of some
other persons make an attempt to
remove household items from the
premises and despite making complaint
to the police authorities no action has
been taken on his compliant.
13. Let this aspect be also examined by
S.S.P. Haridwar and depute some police
personnel, so that no one make an
attempt to remove the article from the
premises and simultaneously the parties
are directed to ensure status quo as on
date. The report furnished by the S.H.O.
be kept in a sealed cover.
(Rakesh Thapliyal, J.)
26.02.2026
Parul
