[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Uttarakhand High Court
WPCRL/264/2026 on 5 February, 2026
Office Notes,
reports, orders
or proceedings
SL.
Date or directions COURT'S OR JUDGES'S ORDERS
No
and Registrar's
order with
Signatures
WPCRL No.264 of 2026
Hon'ble Siddhartha Sah, J.
Mr. Sandeep Kothari, learned counsel
for the petitioner.
2. Mr. Vipul Painully, learned AGA for the
State.
3. Mr. Amar Shukla, learned counsel
holding brief of Mr. K.K. Harbola, learned
counsel for respondent no.3.
4. By means of the present petition, the
petitioner has sought quashing of the FIR
registered as Case Crime Nol.21 of 2026
registered at Police Station Kotwali Roorkee,
District Haridwar, under Sections 318(4),
336(3), 338, 340(1) of BNSS.
5. The counsel for the petitioner has taken
the court through the FIR wherein there are
main allegations of fabrication and forgery
pertaining to Will.
6. The counsel for the petitioner states that
there are two sale deeds dated 28.12.2023
and 04.03.2024 which have been executed
by beneficiary of the Will in favour of the
petitioner.
7. After execution of the aforesaid sale
deeds, the electricity, water bills and other
registration have been duly obtained by the
petitioner and the name of the property has
been changed from the earlier name hotel
Pushp to hotel August Inn. He has futher
submitted that respondent no.3 tried to
barge in the property which led to
registration of FIR on 30.06.2024.
Thereafter, there was a civil suit bearing Suit
No.168 of 2024 in Civil Court, Haridwar and
temporary injunction was granted on
12.08.2024. The said order was modified in
an appeal from order and the position was
changed to status quo. The vendor of the
sale deed Ms. Deepali Sharma had acquired
interest in the property in question through a
Will dated 21.11.2006 which is a registered
deed.
8. Learned counsel for the petitioner also
submitted that an Original Suit No.46 of 2025
was also filed in Civil Court, Haridwar by the
brother of the informant, namely, Mr. Sanjay
Pradhan. There was an earlier O.S. No.72 of
2020, wherein the relief was for declaration
and permanent injunction with regard to the
same property.
9. Learned counsel for the petitioner has
also drawn the attention of the Court to an
order dated 13.12.2024 passed by the court
of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate,
Haridwar by means of which, the application
under Section 175(3) of BNSS preferred by
Mr. Sanjay Pradhan (brother of the
respondent no.3) was rejected.
10. Learned counsel for the respondent no.3
Mr. Amar Murti Shukla submitted that there
is criminal history of the petitioner and there
are two forged Will containing different
contents.
11. Learned counsel for the State Mr. Vipul
Painully has also raised the similar objection.
12. Heard learned counsel for the parties
and after considering the record and the
submissions of the parties, it is clear that
there is prior series of civil litigation
pertaining to the Will that is alleged to be
forged and fabricated in the FIR impugned in
this writ petition.
13. In such view of the matter, there will be
an interim order.
14. Till the next date of listing, no coercive
measure shall be taken against the petitioner
provided the petitioner cooperates with the
investigation pursuant to the FIR bearing
Case Crime No.21 of 2026 registered at
Police Station Kotwali Roorkee, District
Haridwar, under Sections 318(4), 336(3),
338, 340(1) of BNSS.
15. Learned counsel for respondent no.3
prays for and is granted three weeks' time to
file counter affidavit.
16. List this case on 12.03.2026.
17. Urgency Application (IA No.2 of 2026)
and Interim Relief Application (IA No.1 of
2026) stand disposed of accordingly.
[
(Siddhartha Sah, J.)
Vacation Judge
05.02.2026
Ravi
