The Himachal Pradesh High Court has issued a stop-work notice covering a plot in the Chakkar area of Shimla, targeting construction activity linked to complaints about unauthorised multi-storey development and the removal of trees on a considerable scale.
The two-judge panel — led by Chief Justice Gurmeet Singh Sandhawalia and joined by Justice Bipin Chander Negi — raised questions over whether investigators had deliberately left the accused unnamed in the first information report as a way of protecting them.
Boileauganj Police Station's SHO Ankur Thakur told reporters that the FIR under the BNS was filed on 12 October, with the gap between the complaint and its registration traced to the email having been routed into a quarantine folder rather than the main inbox.
Citing its own directive dated 8 October — which had identified Geetika Sood, Vivek Sood, Manish Karol, and developer Tenzin Construction Pvt Ltd as the parties responsible for the unauthorised construction — the bench raised the matter of why the FIR lodged thereafter had recorded the accused simply as "unknown."
The bench characterised the gap in the record as conspicuous, finding that it pointed toward a calculated effort on the part of law enforcement to protect those responsible.
A detailed document filed by the Secretary of the District Legal Services Authority — covering what it described as building-code breaches and a reduction in tree and vegetation cover without proper authorisation — was formally acknowledged by the bench.
Drawing on photographic evidence and Google imagery, the document flagged a building rising six storeys above road level as blocking views across the valley, while a separate multi-storey structure was noted as potentially exceeding what its approved plans permitted.
Among the violations documented were the removal of trees, building activity carried out during the monsoon period in contravention of restrictions on hill-cutting and excavation, and an internal road laid in cement at a width of 5.10 metres — nearly half a metre beyond the 3.50-metre limit set by applicable guidelines.
Among the findings flagged in the document were questions about building activity on parcels classified as Ghasni — land designated for grazing — along with a lack of paperwork confirming how much excavated material had been deposited at approved disposal locations.
Four instructions went out from the bench that day: the SHO was to deliver the order to those occupying the relevant buildings, add the names of the accused to the FIR, wrap up the investigation without delay, and present a progress update when the matter returns to court on 4 November.
