Research › Search › Judgment

Uttarakhand High Court · body

2023 DIGILAW 212 (UTT)

Vipin Nayyar v. State of Uttarakhand

2023-03-01

ALOK KUMAR VERMA, VIPIN SANGHI

body2023
JUDGMENT : VIPIN SANGHI, J. 1. No counter-affidavit has been filed on record. We proceed to dispose of the present writ petition at this stage. 2. The petitioner has preferred this petition to seek a direction to respondent Nos. 2 to 4, who are the police authorities, to provide appropriate protection to the petitioner, and his property, from threats or damage, being caused by respondent Nos. 5 to 9. 3. The brief facts of the case set up by the petitioner have been taken note of in the order dated 08.12.2021. The relevant extract from the said order reads as follows: “(1) Mr. J.S. Virk, the learned Deputy Advocate General accepts notice on behalf of respondent Nos. 1 to 4. (2) The petitioner has filed the present writ petition, inter-alia, on the ground that the petitioner having worked as a Director of an export-oriented Unit in Kota, Rajasthan; he had shifted to Uttarakhand. He started working for social upliftment of the people from remote rural areas, and for issues related to environment. According to the petitioner, respondent No. 7 is the resident of Deecon Valley, Village Tapovan, Tehri Garhwal; he is also holding the office of President of a Deecon Residence Welfare Society (for short ‘welfare society’). Respondent No. 8 is the Treasurer, and the respondent No. 9 is the Vice-President of the welfare society. The petitioner was elected as Secretary of the welfare society on 03.10.2021. He was handed over the financial and official charge on 24.10.2021 by the previous Management Committee. After his assumption in office, the petitioner found various illegalities regarding the welfare society, which are in utter violation of the Uttarakhand Building Construction and Development Bye-laws/ Regulations, 2011. The petitioner also found that the money is being illegally usurped by the office bearers of the welfare society, besides other illegalities. According to the petitioner, he made various complaints to the different authorities against the welfare society. It is alleged that the respondent Nos. 7 to 9 tried to make a sub- committee with few outsiders for the purpose of accounting and office operations, which was objected by the petitioner and by other office bearers. According to the petitioner, he made various complaints to the different authorities against the welfare society. It is alleged that the respondent Nos. 7 to 9 tried to make a sub- committee with few outsiders for the purpose of accounting and office operations, which was objected by the petitioner and by other office bearers. It is also alleged that on 08.11.2021, the private respondents called the petitioner in the office of the welfare society, and threatened him to succumb to their illegal designs or usurpation of money pertaining to the said society, or to suffer with dire consequences. The petitioner refused to follow their illegal instructions. Consequently, the entire official charge was taken away from the petitioner forcibly. The charge was given to the husband of the respondent No. 8. According to the petitioner, despite complaint being made to the Senior Superintendent of Police, District Tehri Garhwal on 10.11.2021, and to Senior Superintendent of Police, District Dehradun on 02.12.2021, no action has been taken against the respondent Nos. 5 to 9 as yet. According to the petitioner, scared of any untoward incident, he resigned from his office of Secretary of the welfare society on 04.12.2021. The petitioner has every apprehension that the private respondents, who are very high-handed persons and have political and criminal contacts, may go to any extent in order to interfere in the peaceful life of the petitioner, and peaceful enjoyment of his property. As such, he is living under constant threat. Hence, the present writ petition before this Court. (3) The learned counsel for the petitioner has reiterated the abovementioned facts. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, despite several complaints made to the police authorities, the petitioner is continuously being threatened by the private respondents. Therefore, he submits that this Court should order the respondent Nos. 2, the Senior Superintendent of Police, District Dehradun, the respondent No. 3 the Senior Superintendent of Police, District Tehri Garwhal, as well as the respondent No. 4, the Station House Officer, P.S. Rishikesh, District Dehradun to immediately provide police protection to the petitioner.” 4. The Court went on to direct the respondent Nos. 2 to 3 to provide police protection to the petitioner for his life and property. The said interim order has continued to operate in the meantime. 5. The Court went on to direct the respondent Nos. 2 to 3 to provide police protection to the petitioner for his life and property. The said interim order has continued to operate in the meantime. 5. It goes without saying that every person is entitled to live his life in a protected environment without any fear or harm being caused by any other party, either to him, or to his property. 6. We, therefore, dispose of this petition with a direction to respondent Nos. 2 to 4- authorities, to make an assessment of the threat perceived by the petitioner and to provide adequate protection to the petitioner and his property from all quarters, including from respondent Nos. 5 to 9. The respondent No. 4 shall counsel respondent Nos. 5 to 9 not to take the law into their own hands qua the petitioner. 7. The petition stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms. 8. Urgent copy of this order be supplied to the learned counsel for the parties, during the course of the day, as per Rules.