Uttarakhand High Court
Lokeshwar Singh vs State Of Uttarakhand on 14 July, 2026
Office
Notes,
reports,
orders or
proceedings
SL.
Date or COURT'S OR JUDGE'S ORDERS
No.
directions
and
Registrar's
order with
Signatures
UKHC010118412026
WPCRL/1288/2026
Lokeshwar Singh
--Petitioner
Versus
State Of Uttarakhand
--Respondent
Hon'ble Alok Mahra, J.
Mr. Arvind Vasistha, learned senior
counsel assisted by Ms. Abhilasha Bisht,
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 seeks issuance of a
writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing
the First Information Report/Case Crime
No. 0047 of 2026 dated 20.04.2026,
registered under Sections 120-B, 323, 342,
355, 392, 504 and 506 of I.P.C. at Police
Station Pithoragarh, District Pithoragarh.
4. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for
the petitioner would submit that the
impugned F.I.R. has been lodged on the
basis of allegations which are materially
inconsistent with the earlier complaint
preferred by respondent no.3 before the
State Police Complaint Authority. It is
submitted that in the said complaint,
respondent no.3 alleged that while the
petitioner was posted as Superintendent of
Police, Pithoragarh, he was allegedly
assaulted inside a room of the police
station by certain persons at the instance
of the petitioner. It was further alleged that
after his release from custody, he
underwent medical treatment and
thereafter preferred a complaint before the
State Police Complaint Authority; that,
Upon consideration of the complaint, the
State Police Complaint Authority, vide
order dated 09.12.2025, directed the
competent authority to initiate disciplinary
proceedings against the petitioner.
Subsequently, respondent no.3 lodged the
present F.I.R.
5. Learned Senior Counsel would further
submit that in the complaint filed before
the State Police Complaint Authority as
well as in the affidavit filed in support
thereof, there was no allegation that any
police personnel had forcibly taken an
amount of ₹4,500/- from the complainant.
It is contended that this allegation has
been made for the first time in the
impugned F.I.R. dated 20.04.2026 with the
sole object of attracting the offence
punishable under Section 392 I.P.C.
against the petitioner; that, except for the
offence under Section 392 I.P.C., the
remaining offences alleged in the F.I.R. are
non-cognizable in nature.
6. Learned Senior Counsel also draws
the attention of this Court to the
allegations in the F.I.R. that on 06.02.2023
at about 1:00 p.m., the complainant had
visited the office of the Superintendent of
Police along with his daughter and, after
interacting with another visitor, the
petitioner allegedly entered his office,
abused the complainant, caught hold of
his collar and dragged him.
6. Learned State Counsel, on the basis of
written instructions received from the
Investigating Officer pursuant to the order
passed on the previous date, would submit
that no entry of the complainant is
available in the visitors’ register of the
office of the Superintendent of Police,
Pithoragarh for 06.02.2023. It is further
submitted that, as per the official records,
the petitioner was present at Police Station
Pithoragarh at the relevant date and time.
Learned State Counsel would also submit
that although the complainant alleged that
he had immediately informed the
emergency helpline (112) about the
incident on 06.02.2023, but, upon
verification, no such call was found to have
been made by the complainant on the said
date.
7. In reply, learned Senior Counsel for
the petitioner would submit that the
written instructions furnished by the State
themselves cast serious doubt on the
veracity of the allegations made by the
complainant, therefore the impugned F.I.R.
deserves to be quashed.
8. Issue notice to respondent no.3,
returnable at an early date.
9. Steps to be taken within one week.
10. List this matter after receipt of the
service report.
11. State/respondent may file counter
affidavit/objections.
12. Having regard to the submissions
advanced by learned counsel for the
parties and considering the facts and
circumstances of the case, it is directed, by
way of an interim measure, that till the
next date of listing, the petitioner shall not
be arrested pursuant to First Information
Report/Case Crime No. 0047 of 2026 dated
20.04.2026, registered at Police Station
Pithoragarh, District Pithoragarh, provided
that the petitioner shall cooperate with the
investigation.
13. Interim relief application stands
disposed of accordingly.
(Alok Mahra, J.)
14.07.2026
Mamta
