HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL

SCRUTINY REPORT
1. Filed on -----------------------------------------------------------------
2. Case No.------------------------3. CNR umber-----------------------
4. Court Fees Paid and if sufficient-------------------------------------
5. If No, Deficiency of.---------------------------------------------------
6. Limitation Began on--------------------Expired on-----------------
7. If barred by Limitation, there is delay of--------------------days
8. If Delay Condonation Application is filed-------------------------
9. If any Caveat has been filed------------------If Yes by -----------
10. Caveator served/not served
11. Notice served on Opposite Party on -------------------------------
12. This is
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------
13. Defects, if any-
(1)--------------------------------------------------------------------------
(2)---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(3)---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(4)---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(5).--------------------------------------------------------------------------
14. Remarks, if any-------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

A.R.O./R.O./S.O. S.O./A.R.(Stamp Reporting)

S.O./A.R.(Defects Scrutiny) D.R.(Institution)
 HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
PRESENTATION FORM
1. Case Category------------------------------------------------
2. District
3. Titled as
4. Name of Advocate(s) with Bar Council Registration
Numbers, Contact Numbers, e-mail addresses etc.
Lalit Sharma , Advocate,
Bar Council Registration Numbers---------
Contact Number, 9412086102
Email: advlalitsharma@yahoo.co.in

Naveen Singh Bisht , Advocate,

Bar Council Registration Numbers---------
Contact Number 8126320630
Email :naveenbisht05@gmail.com
Azmeen Advocate
Bar Council Registration Numbers---------
Contact Number 9897162700
Email : aazmeensheikh@gmal.com
5. Petitioner/Appellant/Applicant etc.-----------------
6. Copies served on whom.------------------------------
7. Mode of service.---------------------------------------
8. Date of the service.-----------------------------------
9. Any other information.------------------------------
Date:
Place: Nainital

(LALIT SHARMA )

(AZMEEN) & (NAVEEN SINGH BISHT)

Advocates
Counsels for the Petitioner
Dated 2022
 IN THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT
NAINITAL
INDEX
IN
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. ________ OF 2022
(Under Article 226 of the Constitution of India)
DISTRICT: UDHAM SINGH NAGAR
Ram Singh aged about 59 years (male)
-----------------Petitioner
VERSUS
State of Uttarakhand through Secretary Home, Dehradun and others.
------------------Respondents
S.N. Description of Paper Page No. Date of Court Part
Filing Fees A/B
Paid
1. Scrutiny Report A -
2. Presentation Form B -
3. Index C-1 to C-2
4. Court paid
5. Date and events of the case
6. Criminal Writ petition
7. Affidavit in support of
criminal writ petition
8. Annexure No. 1 Photostat
as well as a true typed copy
of the complaints dated
19.8.2021 made by the
petitioner no. 1 to the police
of police station Rampura
Rudrapur
9. Annexure No. 2 Photostat
as well as a true typed copy
of the complaint dated
23.8.2021 made by the
petitioner no.1 Tehsildar
Rudrapur
10. Annexure No. 3 Photostat
as well as a true typed copy
of application/undertaking
dated 4.10.2021 submitted
by Abrar Ahmad
11. Annexure No. 4 A
Photostat as well as a true
typed copy of the first
information report dated
28.11.2021 lodged by the
petitioner no. 2
12. Annexure No. 5 The
Photostat a s well as true
typed copies of the report
dated 28.12.2021 ,complaint
dated 28.12.2021 letter
dated 29.12.2021 &
complaint to SSP Udham
Singh Nagar dated
29.12.2021
13. Annexure No. 6 A
Photostat copy of the list of
criminal cases registered
against the accused
respondent No. 3
14. Annexure No. 7 The
Photostat as well as true
typed copy of the FIR dated
23-12-2021
15. Annexure No. 8 A
Photostat copy of the report
submitted by the petitioner
16. Annexure No. 9 A
Photostat copy of the order
dated 7-1-2022 passed by
this Hon’ble court
17. Annexure No. 10 A
Photostat as well as a true
typed copy of the First
information report dated 9-
1-2022
18. Criminal stay application
19. Affidavit in support of
Criminal stay application
20. Vakalatnama
21.
 22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
Entries from Serial No. 1 to Serial No.10 have been filled by me.

(LALIT SHARMA )

(AZMEEN) & (NAVEEN SINGH BISHT)

Advocates
Counsels for the Petitioner
Dated 2022
 IN THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT
NAINITAL
DATE AND EVENTS
IN
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. ________ OF 2022
(Under Article 226 of the Constitution of India)
DISTRICT: UDHAM SINGH NAGAR

Ram Singh aged about 59 years (male)

-----------------Petitioner
VERSUS
State of Uttarakhand through Secretary Home, Dehradun and others.
------------------Respondents
Date Event
The Petitioner is a law abiding citizen having no criminal
history behind him. The petitioner is presently Posted as
Cartographer at Nagar Nigam Rudrapur District Udham
Singh Nagar.

There is political rivalry in two group in Mohalla

Pahadganj Rudrapur District Udham Singh Nagar and one
group is leaded by Auyub Ansari (Respondent no. 3) the
Vice President of Minority Cell of B.J.P. the Ruling party
in the State and another group is leaded by Mr. Abrar
Ahmad the active member and local leader of the Congress
party. It is further submitted here Pahadganj situated on
Nazul land, therefore the groups used to make complaint
against each other regarding the encroachment. It is
relevant to stated here that there were many complainants
regarding unauthorized encroachment on Nazul Land
situated within the local limits of Nagar Nigam Rudrapur
were made to the Nagar Nigam Office.

The Petitioner being Cartographer in Nagar Nigam

Rudrapur he alongwith other officials and Sahayak Nagar
Ayukt has resolved the oral complaints regarding
unauthorized occupation on Nazul Land time to time and
also the authorities of Nagvar Nigam and Sahayak Nagar
Ayukt initiated the proceedings of dispossession of
unauthorized occupant from the Nazul land situated within
 the local limits of Nagar Nigam and the Petitioner as well
as the team organized has faced many problems of
misbehaving with them by the encroacher as well as anti
social elements.

19.8.2021 On the counter complaints made by the members of

aforesaid rival groups against each other the Petitioner
along with the duly constituted team of the official of
Nagar Nigam have reached at spot and got stopped the
unauthorized construction on 19.8.2021 and confiscated
the equipments of construction of both the parties. The
Sahayak Nagar Ayukt Nagar Nigam Rudrapur also made a
complaint to the police of police station Rampura Rudrapur
on 19.8.2021 and Tehsildar Rudrapur on 23.8.2021. It is
also stated here that the above named Abrar Ahmnad also
made an application /undertaking dated 4.10.2021 to the
effect that he will not raise any construction in future.

22.11.2021A complaint was made by Abrar Ahmad regarding

unauthorized and illegal construction raised by one
Mohabbay Ali a close persons of respondent no. 3

24.11.2021 The petitioner along with other member of team reached at

spot on 24.11.2021 for removing the encroachment and
there a marpeet was took place at spot between the
aforesaid two groups in which one PRD person of Nagar
Nigam namely Sri Roop Basant sustained injury on his
head.

28.11.2021 A first information report was lodged by the petitioner in

respect of the aforesaid incident at police station Rudrapur
against the members of both the groups including the
respondent no. 3 of the present case which was registered
on 28.11.2021 as F.I.R, No, 0678 of 2021 Under Section
147, 323, 353 I.P.C

22.12.2021Thereafter the above named Mohabbay Ali the close

person of the respondent no. 3 approached to this Hon’ble
court and filed a Writ petition by concealing the material
fact obtained of his unauthorized and illegal act of
encroachment of Nazul land and raising construction
thereon and obtained an order dated 22.12.2021 from this
 Hon’ble court whereby this Hon’ble court was pleased to
direct the Nagar Nigam to decide the representation of the
above named Mohabbay Ali.

27.12.2021Mohabbay Ali made a representation 27.12.2021 and

thereafter the petitioner and Sahayak Nagar Ayukt Nagar
Nigam Rudrapur made an spot inspection and made video
clipping of spot and also demanded the evidence from
Mohabbay Ali regarding the damages caused to his house
but he failed to do so.

28.12.2021 At the time of aforesaid inspection the respondent no. 3

also tried to mount a political pressure upon the Petitioner
and Sahayak Nagar Ayukt Nagar Nigam Rudrapur by
extending threats to implicate them in false criminal case.
The Sahayak Nagar Ayukt Nagar Nigam Rudrapur
submitted a report dated 28.12.2021 before the Ayukta
Nagar Nigam Rudrapur and also sent a complaint dated
28.12.2021 to the In charge Inspector Police Station
Rudrapur.

29.12.2021 Sahayak Nagar Ayukt Nagar Nigam Rudrapur also wrote a

letter to above named Mohabbay Ali dated 29.12.2021 and
further made a complaint before the S.S.P.Udham Singh
Nagar by Ayukta Nagar Nigam regarding the threats
expended by the respondent no. 3.

The incidents were taken place during the course of

removing the unauthorized encroachment by the
respondent No. 3 and Mohabbay Ali as the aforesaid
persons are trying to deter the Petitioner and other
officials from discharging their legal duties .

The respondent No. 3 is a habitual criminal and indulge in

criminal activities in Uttarakhand as well as Uttar Pradesh
and there are many criminal cases are registered against
the respondent No. 3 and his family members and his
father as well as Mohabbay Ali. The deponent bring on
record the list of criminal cases registered against the
respondent no. 3.
9-12-2021 The respondent approached before this Hon’ble court and
without impleading the Petitioner as a party filed a writ
petition No. 2260 of 2022 Ayub Ansari Vs. State of
Uttarakhand and obtained and ex-parte order of this
Hon’ble court seeking a direction to decide the
representation of the respondent No. 3 (petitioner in the
said writ petition) in the light of section 153, 154 (3) of
Cr.P.C 1973.

23-12-2021 On the basis of the order of this Hon’ble court dated 9-

12-2021 a first information report dated 23-12-2021 was
registered against the petitioner as F.I.R. No. 0730 of
2021 under section 385 IPC at Police Station Rudrapur
District Udham Singh Nagar with false allegations made
therein that the Mohabbay Ali told to the respondent No.
3 that he build a Pakka house and is paying the house
tax but the said house has been demolish due to fled and
the petitioner is calling him. In the said FIR it was also
alleged that the respondent No. 3 also reached at Nagar
Nigam Office where the elder brother of respondent No. 3
namely Mahboob Ali was sitting with the petitioner and
the petitioner said to have disclosed that Abrar Ahmad has
made a complaint against Mohabbay Ali and in case
Mohabbay Ali want to save his house he had to pay Rs.
50,000/- to him as gratification for completion the
repairing work of the house. It is also alleged that the
respondent No. 3 and others refuse to pay Rs. 50,000/-
therefore the petitioner said to have pushed out them
from his office and extended threats that in case they
disclosed the said demand of extortion to anyone he will
lodged FIR against them. b

After registration of the aforesaid first information report

an inquiry was conducted and Sahayak Nagar Ayukt
Nagar Nigam Rudrapur.

7-1-2022 The Sahayak Nagar Ayukt Nagar Nigam Rudrapur

submitted his report in respect of the aforesaid inquiry
report the respondent No. 3 again adopted the same trick
and filed a criminal writ petition No. 32 of 2022 Ayub
Ansari Vs. Stated of Uttarakhand and obtained by
concealing the material facts an order dated 7-1-2022 with
 a directions to station house officer police station Kotwali
Rudrapur District Udham Singh Nagar to registered a
cognizable criminal case on the FIR submitted by the
petitioner and take up the investigation strictly in
accordance with law.

Now the police of police station Rudrapur is trying to

arrest the Petitioner and in case the Petitioner is arrested
in the present false case there is reasonable apprehension
that he may loose his services.

Hence the present writ petition

(LALIT SHARMA )

(AZMEEN) & (NAVEEN SINGH BISHT)

Advocates
Counsels for the Petitioner
Dated 2022
 IN THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT
NAINITAL
COURT FEE
IN
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. ________ OF 2022
(Under Article 226 of the Constitution of India)
DISTRICT: UDHAM SINGH NAGAR

Ram Singh aged about 59 years (male)

-----------------Petitioner
VERSUS
State of Uttarakhand through Secretary Home, Dehradun and others.
------------------Respondents
 IN THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT
NAINITAL

CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. ________ OF 2022

(Under Article 226 of the Constitution of India)
DISTRICT: UDHAM SINGH NAGAR

Ram Singh aged about 59 years (male) S/o Sri Padam Singh Presently
Posted as Cartographer (Manchitrakar) Nagar Nigam Rudrapur
District Udham Singh Nagar.
-----------------Petitioner
VERSUS
1. State of Uttarakhand through Secretary Home, Dehradun
2. Station Officer, Police Station Rudrapur District Udham Singh
Nagar.
3. Sri Ayub Ansari S/o Sri Chhote Ansari R/o Ward No. 15
Pahadganj Rudrapur District Udham Singh Nagar.
------------------Respondents

F.I.R. No. 0730 of 2021

Under Section 385 IPC Police
Station Rudrapur District
Udham Singh Nagar.

To,
The Hon’ble the Chief Justice and his other companion Judges of
the aforesaid Court.
The Humble petition of the above named Petitioner Most
Respectfully showeth as under:

1. That this is the first criminal writ petition on behalf of the

Petitioner seeking a writ order or direction in the nature of certiorari
quashing the impugned First Information Report dated 23-12-2021
registered as F.I.R. No. 0730 of 2021 Under Section 385 IPC,
Police Station Rudrapur District Udham Singh Nagar (Annexure no. 7
to the writ petition). The Petitioner have not filed any other writ
petition for the same and ancillary relief.

2. That the Petitioner is a law abiding citizen having no criminal

history behind him. The petitioner is presently Posted as Cartographer
at Nagar Nigam Rudrapur District Udham Singh Nagar.

3. That there is political rivalry in two group in Mohalla Pahadganj

Rudrapur District Udham Singh Nagar and one group is leaded by
Auyub Ansari (Respondent no. 3) the Vice President of Minority Cell
of B.J.P. the Ruling party in the State and another group is leaded by
Mr. Abrar Ahmad the active member and local leader of the Congress
party. It is further submitted here Pahadganj situated on Nazul land,
therefore the groups used to make complaint against each other
regarding the encroachment. It is relevant to stated here that there were
many complainants regarding unauthorized encroachment on Nazul
Land situated within the local limits of Nagar Nigam Rudrapur were
made to the Nagar Nigam Office. The Petitioner being Cartographer
in Nagar Nigam Rudrapur he alongwith other officials and Sahayak
Nagar Ayukt has resolved the oral complaints regarding unauthorized
occupation on Nazul Land time to time and also the authorities of
Nagvar Nigam and Sahayak Nagar Ayukt initiated the proceedings of
dispossession of unauthorized occupant from the Nazul land situated
within the local limits of Nagar Nigam and the Petitioner as well as the
team organized has faced many problems of misbehaving with them
by the encroacher as well as anti social elements.
4. That it is stated here that on the counter complaints made by the
members of aforesaid rival groups against each other the Petitioner
along with the duly constituted team of the official of Nagar Nigam
have reached at spot and got stopped the unauthorized construction on
19.8.2021 and confiscated the equipments of construction of both the
parties. The Sahayak Nagar Ayukt Nagar Nigam Rudrapur also made a
complaint to the police of police station Rampura Rudrapur on
19.8.2021 and Tehsildar Rudrapur on 23.8.2021. It is also stated here
that the above named Abrar Ahmnad also made an application
/undertaking dated 4.10.2021 to the effect that he will not raise any
construction in future. A Photostat copies as well as true typed copies
of the complaints dated 19.8.2021 and 23.8.2021 made by the Sahayak
Nagar Ayukt Nagar Nigam Rudrapur to the police of police station
Rampura Rudrapur and Tehsildar Rudrapur and
application/undertaking dated 4.10.2021 submitted by Abrar Ahmad
are being filed herewith and are marked as Annexure No. 1, 2 & 3 to
this writ petition.

5. That on 22.11.2021 a complaint was made by Abrar Ahmad

regarding unauthorized and illegal construction raised by one
Mohabbay Ali a close persons of respondent no. 3 therefore the
petitioner along with other member of team reached at spot on
24.11.2021 for removing the encroachment and there a marpeet was
took place at spot between the aforesaid two groups in which one PRD
person of Nagar Nigam namely Sri Roop Basant sustained injury on
his head. A first information report was lodged by the petitioner in
respect of the aforesaid incident at police station Rudrapur against the
members of both the groups including the respondent no. 3 of the
present case which was registered on 28.11.2021 as F.I.R, No, 0678
of 2021 Under Section 147, 323, 353 I.P.C A Photostat as well as a
true typed copy of the first information report dated 28.11.2021 lodged
by the petitioner is being filed herewith and is marked as Annexure
No.4 to this writ petition.

6. That thereafter the above named Mohabbay Ali the close person
of the respondent no. 3 approached to this Hon’ble court and filed a
Writ petition by concealing the material fact obtained of his
unauthorized and illegal act of encroachment of Nazul land and raising
construction thereon and obtained an order dated 22.12.2021 from this
Hon’ble court whereby this Hon’ble court was pleased to direct the
Nagar Nigam to decide the representation of the above named
Mohabbay Ali. It is submitted here that thereafter the above named
Mohabbay Ali made a representation 27.12.2021 and thereafter the
petitioner and Sahayak Nagar Ayukt Nagar Nigam Rudrapur made an
spot inspection and made video clipping of spot and also demanded the
evidence from Mohabbay Ali regarding the damages caused to his
house but he failed to do so.

7. That it is submitted here that at the time of aforesaid inspection

the respondent no. 3 also tried to mount a political pressure upon the
Petitioner and Sahayak Nagar Ayukt Nagar Nigam Rudrapur by
extending threats to implicate them in false criminal case. The
Sahayak Nagar Ayukt Nagar Nigam Rudrapur submitted a report dated
28.12.2021 before the Ayukta Nagar Nigam Rudrapur and also sent a
complaint dated 28.12.2021 to the In charge Inspector Police Station
Rudrapur. It is also submitted here that the Sahayak Nagar Ayukt
Nagar Nigam Rudrapur also wrote a letter to above named Mohabbay
Ali dated 29.12.2021 and further made a complaint before the
S.S.P.Udham Singh Nagar by Ayukta Nagar Nigam regarding the
threats expended by the respondent no. 3. The Photostat copies of the a
report dated 28.12.2021 submitted by Sahayak Nagar Ayukt Nagar
Nigam Rudrapur before the Ayukta Nagar Nigam Rudrapur, complaint
dated 28.12.2021 sent to in-charge Inspector Police Station Rudrapur,
letter to Mohabbay Ali dated 29.12.2021 and complaint dated
29.12.2021 submitted before the S.S.P. Udham Singh Nagar by Ayukta
regarding the threats expended by respondent no. 3 for dragging the
Petitioner in false criminal cases are being filed herewith and are
marked as Annexure No. 5 to this writ petition.

8. That it is submitted here that the aforesaid incidents were taken

place during the course of removing the unauthorized encroachment
by the respondent No. 3 and Mohabbay Ali as the aforesaid persons
are trying to deter the Petitioner and other officials from discharging
their legal duties .

9. That it is relevant stated here that the respondent No. 3 is a

habitual criminal and indulge in criminal activities in Uttarakhand as
well as Uttar Pradesh and there are many criminal cases are registered
against the respondent No. 3 and his family members and his father as
well as Mohabbay Ali. The deponent bring on record the list of
criminal cases registered against the respondent no. 3. A Photostat
copy of the list of criminal cases registered against the accused
respondent No. 3 is being filed herewith and is marked as Annexure
No. 6 to this writ petition.
10. That as the Police of Police Station Rudrapur is well known that
the accused respondent no. 3 is a habitual criminal and involved in
many offences of loot, attempt to murder, extortion, kidnapping for
murder and other offences therefore he in a very clandestine manner
has made a alleged complaint to the police of police station Rudrapur
by post but the copy of the said complaint was never sent to the police
rather the same was sent to the higher authorities and thereafter on
the basis of the said complaints he immediately approached before
this Hon’ble court and without impleading the Petitioner as a party
filed a writ petition No. 2260 of 2022 Ayub Ansari Vs. State of
Uttarakhand and obtained and ex-parte order of this Hon’ble court
seeking a direction to decide the representation of the respondent No.
3 (petitioner in the said writ petition) in the light of section 153, 154
(3) of Cr.P.C 1973. On the basis of the order of this Hon’ble court
dated 9-12-2021 a first information report dated 23-12-2021 was
registered against the petitioner as F.I.R. No. 0730 of 2021 under
section 385 IPC at Police Station Rudrapur District Udham Singh
Nagar with false allegations made therein that the Mohabbay Ali told
to the respondent No. 3 that he build a Pakka house and is paying
the house tax but the said house has been demolish due to fled and the
petitioner is calling him. In the said FIR it was also alleged that the
respondent No. 3 also reached at Nagar Nigam Office where the elder
brother of respondent No. 3 namely Mahboob Ali was sitting with the
petitioner and the petitioner said to have disclosed that Abrar Ahmad
has made a complaint against Mohabbay Ali and in case Mohabbay
Ali want to save his house he had to pay Rs. 50,000/- to him as
gratification for completion the repairing work of the house. It is also
alleged that the respondent No. 3 and others refuse to pay Rs.
50,000/- therefore the petitioner said to have pushed out them from
his office and extended threats that in case they disclosed the said
demand of extortion to anyone he will lodged FIR against them. The
Photostat as well as true typed copy of the FIR dated 23-12-2021 is
being filed herewith and is marked as Annexure No. 7 to this writ
petition.

11. That it is relevant to stated here that after registration of the

aforesaid first information report an inquiry was conducted and
Sahayak Nagar Ayukt Nagar Nigam Rudrapur. A Photostat copy of
the report submitted by the Sahayak Nagar Ayukt Nagar Nigam
Rudrapur is being filed herewith and are marked as Annexure No. 8 to
this writ petition.

12. That it is submitted here that when the Sahayak Nagar Ayukt
Nagar Nigam Rudrapur submitted his report in respect of the
aforesaid inquiry report the respondent No. 3 again adopted the same
trick and filed a criminal writ petition No. 32 of 2022 Ayub Ansari
Vs. Stated of Uttarakhand and obtained by concealing the material
facts an order dated 7-1-2022 with a directions to station house
officer police station Kotwali Rudrapur District Udham Singh Nagar to
registered a cognizable criminal case on the FIR submitted by the
petitioner and take up the investigation strictly in accordance with
law. A Photostat copy of the order dated 7-1-2022 passed by this
Hon’ble court is being filed herewith and is marked as Annexure No.
9 to this writ petition.
13. That now in compliance of the order dated 7-1-2022 the first
information report No. 0013 of 2022 Under Section 323, 506, 364
IPC has been registered against the Petitioner with false and frivolous
allegations that in order to get withdrawn the FIR lodged by
respondent No. 3 against the petitioner the Petitioner and Sahayak
Nagar Ayukt Nagar Nigam Rudrapur Said to have got boarded the
respondent No. 3 in their car and brought him to Haldwani and they
gave beating to the respondent No. 3 and extended threats that in case
he is not withdraw the FIR against the respondent No. 3 they will kill
him and thereafter the petitioner also told that they left their mobiles at
Nagar Nigam Rudrapur and the police will not suspect them and also
extended threats to implicate the respondent under section 353, 323
IPC. A Photostat as well as a true typed copy of the First information
report dated 9-1-2022 is being filed herewith and is marked as
Annexure No. 10 to this writ petition.

14. That the Petitioner is innocent and have not committed any
offence. The allegations made in the first information report are false
and frivolous and made only in order to pressurized the petitioner as
well as the other employee and officers Nagar Nigam to with hold the
demolition proceeding initiated against the encroacher who are none
else but the close persons of the respondent no. 3. The respondent No.
3 who by making false allegations obtained orders of this Hon’ble
court by playing fraud and concealing the material fact behind the back
of Petitioner and there is no opportunity was afforded to the Petitioner
for bringing on the record the correct facts.
15. That the allegations made in the first information report are false
and frivolous. The above named Mohabbay Ali or the respondent no. 3
have never made any complaint to the Higher Authorities of the Nagar
Nigam or any other competent authority regarding the alleged demand
of illegal gratification of Rs. 50,000/ from the above named Mohabbay
Ali. It is further submitted that the alleged demand of illegal
gratification does not constitute any offence punishable under section
385 I.P.C.

15. That the aforesaid facts clearly establish that the impugned first
information report has been lodged against the petitioner only to deter
him from discharging his official duties by the respondent No. 3 who
himself is a hard an criminal as is evident from the list of the criminal
cases pending against him.

17. That it is submitted here that the allegations made in the alleged
complaints clearly shows that the allegations made against the
Petitioner who is the official of Nagar Nigam and the dispute relates to
the Nazul land but to the utter surprise of the Petitioner neither he was
made in the writ petition nor the State who was impleaded as party in
the writ petition and represented by State counsel for the reason best
known it the State has not pointed out this fact before this Hon’ble
court at the time of hearing of the writ petitions filed by the respondent
no. 3 consequently now the Petitioner has been victimized by the
respondent no.3 in false criminal cases.
18. That now the police of police station Rudrapur is trying to arrest
the Petitioner and in case the Petitioner is arrested in the present false
case there is reasonable apprehension that he may loose his services.

19. That the impugned first information report is illegal and

improper and on the basis of the material on record no offence
punishable under section 385 IPC is made out against the Petitioner
therefore the first information report is liable to be quashed by this
Hon’ble court.

20. That the impugned first information report has been lodged by
the respondent No. 3 after obtaining the ex-parte order of this
Hon’ble court shows that the respondent No. 3 who himself is a
habitual criminal and indulge in committing the offences of serious
nature and now he is taking the advantage of his being a local leader
of Ruling party in the State is gaining undue benefits by helping the
encroachers and by implicating the officials of Nagar Nigam in false
criminal cases so they may be deter them from discharging public
duties.

21. That the impugned first information report is a result of counter

blast to the eviction and demolitions proceedings initiated by the
Nagar Nigam under the supervision of the Petitioner and also counter
blast to the complaints and first information report lodged by the
Petitioner against the respondent No. 3 and his associates.
22. That it is a settled principle of law laid down by Hon’ble Apex
Court that the disclosure of cognizable offence in F.I.R. or complaint,
arrest of accused is not ‘must’ and the use of word ‘may’ in Section 41
of Cr.P.C. cannot be interpret as ‘must’ or ‘shall’.

23. That there are no ingredients that the Petitioner made any
extortion therefore no offence punishable under section 385 I.P.C. is
made out against the Petitioner. The offence is punishable with a
sentenced of 2 years and is bailable and thus less then 7 years therefore
in view of the settled principle of Hon’ble apex court in the matter of
Arnesh Kumar Vs. State of Vihar the arrest of the petitioner is illegal
and improper.

24. That until unless credible material evidence is collected by the

I.O. against the Petitioner as to justify their arrest the I.O. has no right
to curtail the liberty of the Petitioner guaranteed under constitution of
India by arresting the Petitioner in a totally false case against him.

25. That the impugned first information report has been lodged with
a malafide and oblique intention by the respondent no. 3 by obtaining
an order of this Hon’ble court by practicing a fraud upon this Hon’ble
court and the impugned first information report does not lay down any
foundation for a lawful investigation and valid prosecution of the
Petitioner. Therefore, the same is liable to be quashed.

26. That as a matter of fact the were not even prima facie constitute
an offence punishable under Section 385 I.P.C. against the Petitioner.
27. That the Petitioner are employee of the Nagar Nigam Rudrapur
and have no intention or motive to commit the alleged offence rather it
is the respondent no.3 who has a motive to falsely implicate the
Petitioner in false criminal cases.

28. That the Petitioner are public servants and in case they are
arrested by the police in the aforesaid false criminal cases the
Petitioner may loose his service.

29. That the Petitioner under take before this Hon’ble Court if this
Hon’ble Court pleased to stay the arrest of the Petitioner they will fully
cooperate with the investigated agency.

30. That Petitioner have no other alternative remedy except to invoke

extraordinary jurisdiction of this Hon’ble Court under Article 226 of
the Constitution of India inter alia on the following amongst others.

GROUNDS
A. Because the Petitioner is innocent and have not committed any
offence. The allegations made in the first information report are false
and frivolous and made only in order to pressurized the petitioner as
well as the other employee and officers Nagar Nigam to with hold the
demolition proceeding initiated against the encroacher who are none
else but the close persons of the respondent no. 3. The respondent No.
3 who by making false allegations obtained orders of this Hon’ble
court by playing fraud and concealing the material fact behind the back
of Petitioner and there is no opportunity was afforded to the Petitioner
for bringing on the record the correct facts.

B. Because the allegations made in the first information report are

false and frivolous. The above named Mohabbay Ali or the respondent
no. 3 have never made any complaint to the Higher Authorities of the
Nagar Nigam or any other competent authority regarding the alleged
demand of illegal gratification of Rs. 50,000/ from the above named
Mohabbay Ali. It is further submitted that the alleged demand of
illegal gratification does not constitute any offence punishable under
section 385 I.P.C.

C. Because the aforesaid facts clearly establish that the impugned

first information report has been lodged against the petitioner only to
deter him from discharging his official duties by the respondent No. 3
who himself is a hard an criminal as is evident from the list of the
criminal cases pending against him.

D. Because the allegations made in the alleged complaints clearly

shows that the allegations made against the Petitioner who is the
official of Nagar Nigam and the dispute relates to the Nazul land but to
the utter surprise of the Petitioner neither he was made in the writ
petition nor the State who was impleaded as party in the writ petition
and represented by State counsel for the reason best known it the
State has not pointed out this fact before this Hon’ble court at the time
of hearing of the writ petitions filed by the respondent no. 3
consequently now the Petitioner has been victimized by the respondent
no.3 in false criminal cases.
E. Because now the police of police station Rudrapur is trying to
arrest the Petitioner and in case the Petitioner is arrested in the
present false case there is reasonable apprehension that he may loose
his services.

F. Because the impugned first information report is illegal and

improper and on the basis of the material on record no offence
punishable under section 385 IPC is made out against the Petitioner
therefore the first information report is liable to be quashed by this
Hon’ble court.

G. Because the impugned first information report has been lodged

by the respondent No. 3 after obtaining the ex-parte order of this
Hon’ble court shows that the respondent No. 3 who himself is a
habitual criminal and indulge in committing the offences of serious
nature and now he is taking the advantage of his being a local leader
of Ruling party in the State is gaining undue benefits by helping the
encroachers and by implicating the officials of Nagar Nigam in false
criminal cases so they may be deter them from discharging public
duties.

H. Because the impugned first information report is a result of

counter blast to the eviction and demolitions proceedings initiated by
the Nagar Nigam under the supervision of the Petitioner and also
counter blast to the complaints and first information report lodged by
the Petitioner against the respondent No. 3 and his associates.
I. Because it is a settled principle of law laid down by Hon’ble
Apex Court that the disclosure of cognizable offence in F.I.R. or
complaint, arrest of accused is not ‘must’ and the use of word ‘may’ in
Section 41 of Cr.P.C. cannot be interpret as ‘must’ or ‘shall’.

J. Because there are no ingredients that the Petitioner made any

extortion therefore no offence punishable under section 385 I.P.C. is
made out against the Petitioner. The offence is punishable with a
sentenced of 2 years and is bailable and thus less then 7 years therefore
in view of the settled principle of Hon’ble apex court in the matter of
Arnesh Kumar Vs. State of Vihar the arrest of the petitioner is illegal
and improper.

K. Because until unless credible material evidence is collected by

the I.O. against the Petitioner as to justify their arrest the I.O. has no
right to curtail the liberty of the Petitioner guaranteed under
constitution of India by arresting the Petitioner in a totally false case
against him.

L. Because the impugned first information report has been lodged

with a malafide and oblique intention by the respondent no. 3 by
obtaining an order of this Hon’ble court by practicing a fraud upon this
Hon’ble court and the impugned first information report does not lay
down any foundation for a lawful investigation and valid prosecution
of the Petitioner. Therefore, the same is liable to be quashed.
M. Because as a matter of fact the were not even prima facie
constitute an offence punishable under Section 385 I.P.C. against the
Petitioner.

N. Because the Petitioner are employee of the Nagar Nigam

Rudrapur and have no intention or motive to commit the alleged
offence rather it is the respondent no.3 who has a motive to falsely
implicate the Petitioner in false criminal cases.

O. Because the Petitioner are public servants and in case they are
arrested by the police in the aforesaid false criminal cases the
Petitioner may loose his service.

P. Because the Petitioner under take before this Hon’ble Court if

this Hon’ble Court pleased to stay the arrest of the Petitioner they will
fully cooperate with the investigated agency.

PRAYER
It is therefore, Most respectfully prayed that this Hon’ble court
may be pleased to allow this writ petition and to issue:
(i) a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the
impugned First Information Report dated 23-12-2021 registered
as F.I.R. No. 0730 of 2021 Under Section 385 IPC, at
Police Station Rudrapur District Udham Singh Nagar (Annexure
no. 7 to the writ petition).
(ii) a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding
the respondent no. 3 not to arrest and not to harass the Petitioner
 F.I.R. No. 0730 of 2021 Under Section 385 IPC, at Police
Station Rudrapur District Udham Singh Nagar.
(iii) any other suitable writ, order or which this Hon’ble Court may
deem fit and proper.
(iv) award the cost of the petition to the Petitioner.

(LALIT SHARMA )

(AZMEEN) & (NAVEEN SINGH BISHT)

Advocates
Counsels for the Petitioner
Dated 2022
 IN THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT
NAINITAL
AFFIDAVIT
IN
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. ________ OF 2022
(Under Article 226 of the Constitution of India)
DISTRICT: UDHAM SINGH NAGAR

Ram Singh aged about 59 years (male)

-----------------Petitioner
VERSUS
State of Uttarakhand through Secretary Home, Dehradun and others.
------------------Respondents

Affidavit of Sri Ram Singh

aged about 59 years (male)
S/o Sri Padam Singh
Presently Posted as
Cartographer (Manchitrakar)
Nagar Nigam Rudrapur
District Udham Singh Nagar.

(Deponent)
I, the deponent named above do hereby solemnly affirm and state
on oath as under:-

1. That the deponent is sole petitioner in the aforesaid writ petition

and as such he is fully acquainted with the facts and circumstances of
the case and is in a position to depose as under:-

I, the deponent above named do hereby declare that contents of

para no. 1 of this affidavit and those of paragraph Nos.
-------------------------------------------------------- of writ petition are true
to my personal knowledge and those of the contents of para no.
------------------------------------------------------------------ of writ petition
are based on perusal of records, and those of the para no.
----------------------------------------------------------------------- of writ
petition are based on legal advice, which all I verify and believe to be
true that no part of this affidavit is false and nothing material has been
concealed.
SO HELP ME GOD

LTI

DEPONENT

I, Azmeen Advocate High Court of Uttarakhand at Nainital do

hereby declare that the person making this affidavit and alleging
himself to be deponent, is known to me through the perusal of records.

Advocate
Reg. No.
Solemnly affirm before me on this -------- day of 2022 at
about ______/am/pm by the deponent, who has been identified by the
aforesaid Advocate.
I has satisfied myself by examining the deponent, who has
understood the contents of the affidavit, and which has been read over
and explained to him by me.

OATH COMMISSONER
 IN THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT
NAINITAL
CRIMINAL MISC. STAY APPLICATION NO. OF 2022
IN
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. ________ OF 2022
(Under Article 226 of the Constitution of India)
DISTRICT: UDHAM SINGH NAGAR

Ram Singh aged about 59 years (male) S/o Sri Padam Singh Presently
Posted as Cartographer (Manchitrakar) Nagar Nigam Rudrapur
District Udham Singh Nagar.

-----------------Petitioner
VERSUS
1. State of Uttarakhand through Secretary Home, Dehradun
2. Station Officer, Police Station Rudrapur District Udham Singh
Nagar.
3. Sri Ayub Ansari S/o Sri Chhote Ansari R/o Ward No. 15
Pahadganj Rudrapur District Udham Singh Nagar.
------------------Respondents
F.I.R. No. 0730 of 2021
Under Section 385 IPC, Police
Station Rudrapur District
Udham Singh Nagar
To,
The Hon'ble the Chief Justice and his other companion Judges of
the aforesaid court.
The humble application of the above named Petitioner Most
respectfully showeth as under:
1. That the writ petition aforesaid has been filed on behalf of the
Petitioner seeking a writ order or direction in the nature of certiorari
quashing the impugned First Information Report dated 23-12-2021
registered as F.I.R. No. 0730 of 2021 Under Section 385 IPC,
Police Station Rudrapur District Udham Singh Nagar . The entire facts
and circumstances of the present case mentioned in the accompanying
writ petition which forms part of the present application and the same
are not being repeated for the sake of brevity.

2. That in the garb of the first information report the police is trying
to arrest the Petitioner in the aforesaid criminal case. The Petitioner are
public servants and in case they are arrested by the police in the
aforesaid false criminal cases the Petitioner may loose their services
and the purpose of filing the writ petition will be frustrated.

3. That under these circumstances it is expedient in the interest of

justice that the arrest of the Petitioner F.I.R. No. 0730 of 2021
Under Section 385 IPC, Police Station Rudrapur District Udham
Singh Nagar may be stayed during the pendency of the writ petition
otherwise the Petitioner shall suffer irreparable loss and injury.
PRAYER
It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble court
may be pleased to allow this application and the arrest of the Petitioner
in F.I.R. No. 0730 of 2021 Under Section 385 IPC, Police Station
Rudrapur District Udham Singh Nagar may be stayed during the
pendency of the writ petition before this Hon’ble Court.

(LALIT SHARMA )

(AZMEEN) & (NAVEEN SINGH BISHT)

Advocates
Counsels for the Petitioner
Dated 2022
 IN THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT
NAINITAL
AFFIDAVIT
IN
CRIMINAL MISC. STAY APPLICATION NO. OF 2022
IN
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. ________ OF 2022
(Under Article 226 of the Constitution of India)
DISTRICT: UDHAM SINGH NAGAR
Ram Singh aged about 59 years (male).
-----------------Petitioner
VERSUS
State of Uttarakhand through Secretary Home, Dehradun and others.
------------------Respondents

Affidavit of Sri Ram Singh

aged about 59 years (male)
S/o Sri Padam Singh
Presently Posted as
Cartographer (Manchitrakar)
Nagar Nigam Rudrapur
District Udham Singh Nagar.

(Deponent)

I, the deponent named above do hereby solemnly affirm and state

on oath as under:-

1. That the deponent is sole petitioner in the aforesaid writ petition

and as such he is fully acquainted with the facts and circumstances of
the case and is in a position to depose as under:-

I, the deponent above named do hereby declare that contents of

para no. 1 of this affidavit and those of paragraph Nos.
----------------------------------- of the accompanying stay application are
true to my personal knowledge and those of the contents of para no.
---------------- of the accompanying stay application are based on
perusal of records, and those of the para no.
-------------------------------------------- of the accompanying stay
application are based on legal advice, which all I verify and believe to
be true that no part of this affidavit is false and nothing material has
been concealed.
SO HELP ME GOD

LTI
DEPONENT

I, Azmeen Advocate High Court of Uttarakhand at Nainital do

hereby declare that the person making this affidavit and alleging
himself to be deponent, is known to me through the perusal of records.

Advocate
Reg. No.

Solemnly affirm before me on this -------- day of 2022 at

about ______/am/pm by the deponent, who has been identified by the
aforesaid Advocate.
I has satisfied myself by examining the deponent, who has
understood the contents of the affidavit, which has been read over and
explained to him by me.

OATH COMMISSONER