Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Judgments of 2026

15781 judgments · newest first · showing 4201–4400

RAMUGRE AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioners, Ramugre and another, filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking the quashing of the FIR registered against them. During the hearing, counsel for the petitioners withdrew the request for quashing the FIR and instead asked the court to grant them leave to approach a …

VINAY PATHAKversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

Vinay Pathak filed a writ petition seeking relief from road tax recovery for his vehicle (registration UP 54 T 8131) for the period December 2022 to May 2026, asserting that the vehicle was a total loss after a road accident and therefore unusable. The State of Uttar Pradesh contended that the tax …

KAIF AND 5 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

Petitioners Kaif and five others filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking to quash an FIR dated 01‑09‑2026 and to restrain their arrest under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 110, 115(2), 117(2) and 351(3) of the B.N.S. The petition also prayed that the police follow the arrest guidelines laid …

MUSHRRAFversusSTATE OF U.P.

The applicant, Mushrraf, filed an anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the CrPC in a case registered under Section 29 of the NDPS Act, fearing arrest after a co-accused's confessional statement implicated him as the supplier of 11.50 grams of heroin. The co-accused, Sakib Pathan, had …

RAJU VISHWAKARMAversusSTATE OF U.P.

The applicant, Raju Vishwakarma, sought anticipatory bail in a case alleging that his vehicle was used to transport seven bulls for slaughter, invoking sections 3, 5 and 8 of the U.P. Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act and section 11(1)(D) of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act. He contended that …

SARITA DEVI AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court considered an anticipatory bail application filed by Sarita Devi and her son Abhishek Kumar, who were named in an FIR under Sections 316(5), 351(3), 352 of the IPC and the Essential Commodities Act. The applicants claimed the FIR was false, arising from a delayed filing after a …

HARIOM SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P.

The Allahabad High Court considered a bail application filed by Hariom Singh, who was arrested in a NDPS case (Crime No. 425 of 2026) for alleged possession of 10.118 kg of ganja. The applicant's counsel argued that the recovery was below commercial quantity, that mandatory provisions of Sections …

RAVIversusSTATE OF U.P.

Allowed/Partly Allowed on merits

The High Court considered a bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, on behalf of Ravi, who was arrested in connection with a murder case (Sections 103(1) and 238(A) BNS). The prosecution presented evidence including an obscure video showing the …

ASHOK PRADHANversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The applicant filed an application under Section 528 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking to quash an order dated 20‑08‑2026 passed in Session Trial No. 442 of 2015 concerning offences under Sections 302 and 120‑B IPC. The case had been listed for defence evidence on multiple …

PRASHANT KUMAR SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The applicant filed an application under Section 529 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, seeking a court order directing the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.6, Varanasi, to dispose of a pending complaint (Case No. 29 of 2026) filed under Section 138 of the Negotiable …

M/S RMV MOTELS LLPversusUNION OF INDIA AND 4 OTHERS

M/S Rmv Motels LLP filed a writ petition challenging an order dated 31.12.2025 passed by Respondent No.4 under Section 74 of the CGST/UTGST Act, 2017 concerning assessments for FY 2018-19 and 2019-20. The revenue counsel raised a preliminary objection that the order was appealable, while the …

DHARMENDRAversusSTATE OF U.P.

The applicant, Dharmendra, filed an anticipatory bail application in a case registered under Section 3(1) of the U.P. Gangsters and Anti‑Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, fearing arrest. He contended that he had been falsely implicated, noting that the only base case against him already …

SMT RAJ BALAversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The applicant, Smt Raj Bala, filed an application under Section 529 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, seeking a direction to the Civil Judge/Junior Division or Judicial Magistrate in Jansath, Muzaffar Nagar, to decide a pending criminal case (Case No.2725 of 2024) involving offences …

SMT. MITHLESH SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 4 OTHERS

Smt. Mithlesh Singh filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing the State of Uttar Pradesh and other respondents to pay her death‑cum‑retirement gratuity with interest, and also directing the District Inspector of School (Respondent No.3) to decide a representation dated 24‑08‑2026. The …

SUDHIR TYAGIversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The applicant, Sudhir Tyagi, filed an application under Section 528 of the Criminal Procedure Code seeking the quashing of a charge‑sheet dated 19‑08‑2024 and the cognizance order dated 15‑11‑2025 in Criminal Case No.1554 of 2025, which alleged offences under Sections 406 and 506 of the IPC. The …

BABLOOversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

Babloo filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking to quash an FIR dated 03.05.2026 under Sections 316(2) and 351(2) of the B.N.S. and to restrain his arrest. The petitioner also made an innocuous prayer that the police follow the Supreme Court guidelines laid down in Arnesh Kumar v. State …

YOGESH MEENAversusSTATE OF U.P.

Yogesh Meena applied for bail in a criminal case (FIR No.158 of 2026) involving multiple offences under the BNS Act and the Criminal Law Amendment Act. The court considered the facts, the submissions of counsel, and noted that a co‑accused, Abhay, had already been granted bail in a similar case. The …

RUPESH RAIversusSTATE OF U.P.

Rupesh Rai was charged under multiple provisions of the Indian Penal Code and Section 7 of the Criminal Law Amendment Act in Crime No. 149 of 2026. He applied for bail during the pendency of trial, submitting a supplementary affidavit. The Court examined the facts, the submissions of counsel, and …

ASMITA AND 2 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The applicants filed an application under Section 529 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, seeking a direction to the Principal Judge of the Family Court, Kushinagar, to decide a pending maintenance case (No. 402 of 2024) within a reasonable time. The High Court noted that the case had …

PAPPUversusSTATE OF U.P.

The applicant, Pappu, filed an anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code. The informant's counsel highlighted that the applicant had a pending criminal case (Case Crime No.141/2026) and had failed to disclose this in his affidavit, falsely declaring no prior …

AMIT GUPTAversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The applicant, Amit Gupta, filed an application under Section 529 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, seeking a court order directing the Additional Court‑Ist, Agra to dispose of a pending complaint (Case No. 3831 of 2020) filed under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The …

PRASHANT KUMAR SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The applicant, Prashant Kumar Singh, filed an application under Section 529 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, seeking a direction to the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate (ACJM), Court No.6, Varanasi, to decide a pending complaint (Case No. 4146 of 2025) filed under Section 138 of …

VIRENDRA KUMARversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The applicant, Virendra Kumar, filed an application under Section 529 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, seeking a court direction to the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-II, Gautam Buddh Nagar, to decide a pending complaint (Case No. 154 of 2025) filed under Section 138 of the …

RAMESH CHANDRA @ GUDDU AND 3 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The applicants filed an application under Section 528 of the Criminal Procedure Code seeking to quash a chargesheet dated 09‑10‑2023 and a cognizance order dated 12‑03‑2023 in a case arising from an N.C.R. under Section 504 IPC, a non‑cognizable offence. They contended that, per the explanation to …

RAMRAJ YADAV ALIAS RAJA RAM YADAV AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The applicants, Ramraj Yadav and another, filed an application under Section 528 of the BNSS seeking to quash the cognizance and summoning order dated 29‑03‑2025 in Criminal Case No.202 of 2025, which was based on a charge‑sheet filed by the investigating officer under Sections 324(5) and 351(3) of …

ARVIND KUMAR GUPTAversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The applicant Arvind Kumar Gupta filed an application under Section 528 of the BNSS Act seeking discharge (उन्मोचन) in a criminal case (Criminal Appeal No 226/2025) pending before the Court of Judicial Magistrate‑First Class, Mirzapur. The applicant contended that he was innocent and that the order …

M/S TRIDEV INTERPRISESversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The petitioner, M/s Tridev Enterprises, entered into an agreement with the State of U.P. to capture stray animals on the Bundelkhand Expressway and subsequently claimed Rs.89,17,448. When the amount was not paid, the petitioner filed a writ petition and also submitted a representation on 5 June 2026 …

AKASH TIWARIversusSTATE OF U.P THROUGH SECRETARY(HOME) U.P., LUCKNOW

The applicant, Akash Tiwari, filed a bail application in a case registered under Sections 2(b)(1) and 3(1) of the Uttar Pradesh Gangster and Anti‑Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, alleging that he had been falsely implicated due to police rivalry and had no prior criminal record aside from …

KHAN GUFRAN AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The applicants filed an application under Section 528 of the CrPC seeking quash of criminal proceedings, asserting that the dispute had been amicably settled and a compromise was verified by the trial court on 13 March 2026. The State and the second opposite party did not contest the settlement. The …

MANJESH KUMARversusAUTHORISED OFFICER, INDIAN BANK AND ANOTHER

The petitioner, Manjesh Kumar, filed a writ petition before the Allahabad High Court. After hearing, the petitioner’s counsel requested dismissal of the petition on the ground that it was not pressed. The Court accepted this prayer and dismissed the petition as not pressed. No substantive merits of …

SAMEERversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court considered a bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, on behalf of Sameer, who was arrested in connection with a murder case (Crime No. 142 of 2024) involving charges under IPC sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 307 and 302. The applicant …

GYAN LATA PAL AND 7 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 21 OTHERS

The writ petition (Writ A No. 21015 of 2024) filed by Gyan Lata Pal and others against the State of U.P. and others was disposed by the Allahabad High Court. The petition was heard before Justice Anish Kumar Gupta. No substantive findings on facts or legal issues were recorded in the present order. …

SMT. GUDIYA @ KAMAR SHAHEEN AND 7 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The applicants filed an application under Section 528 of the B.N.S.S. seeking to quash a charge sheet dated 07‑01‑2025 and related orders in a criminal case (Crime No. 375 of 2023) involving offences under Sections 498‑A, 323, 504, 506, 406 IPC, the Dowry Prohibition Act and the Muslim Women …

RIZWAN ALI AND 2 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The applicants filed an application under Section 528 of the B.N.S.S. seeking to quash criminal proceedings (Case No.30 of 2014) arising from an FIR under IPC sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 and Dowry Prohibition Act sections 3 and 4. The parties had reached an out‑of‑court settlement, and the opposite …

MUNNA LAL AND 3 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The applicants Munna Lal and others were charged under IPC sections 498‑A, 354Ka, 323, 504 and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act for a dowry‑related offence. They later settled the dispute out of court and filed an application under Section 528 of the B.N.S.S. seeking quash of the …

AMAN AZIM AND 2 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The applicants Aman Azim and others filed an application under Section 528 of the Criminal Procedure Code seeking to quash the charge sheet and cognizance order in a criminal case filed under sections 85, 115(2) of the B.N.S Act, the Dowry Prohibition Act and the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights …

KAPIL KUMAR AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The applicants, Kapil Kumar and another, were charged under Sections 498A, 452, 323, 504 IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act in a case pending before the Civil Judge (J.D.)/FTC1, Ghaziabad. The parties reached an out‑of‑court settlement, which was verified by the trial court on …

SAJIWAN AND OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P.

The appeal was filed by Sajiwan and others against the State of U.P. but neither appellant appeared in the revised list. The court learned that appellant No.1, Sajiwan alias Ram Sajeewan, had died, as confirmed by a death verification report from the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kanpur Dehat. The …

CHIRONJI LALversusSTATE OF U.P.

The appellant, Chironji Lal, filed a criminal appeal (No. 16 of 1987) before the Allahabad High Court. During the pendency of the appeal, the appellant died, as recorded in the living status report of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Shahjahanpur. The court noted that the appeal had already been …

ASHOK PUNJABIversusSTATE OF U.P.

The appellant, Ashok Punjabi, filed a criminal appeal before the Allahabad High Court. During the pendency of the appeal, the appellant died in 2021, as evidenced by a police report, statements of his wife and others, and a death certificate. The court considered whether the appeal could continue …

PHOOL SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P.

The appellant Phool Singh filed a criminal appeal (No. 3124 of 1986) before the Allahabad High Court. Before the hearing, the appellant died, as confirmed by a death verification report from the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Farrukhabad. The court considered whether the appeal could continue in the …

KESH PAL AND OTHERSversusSTATE

The appeal was filed by Kesh Pal and others against the State. During the proceedings, it was reported that appellant No.1, Kishan Pal, had died as per a report from the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ghaziabad. Consequently, the court held that the proceedings against the deceased stand abated. Since …

RAMESHversusSTATE

The appellants Ramesh and Kalu were convicted by the Sessions Court for raping Smt. Munni under Section 376 IPC. On appeal, the High Court examined the prosecution's case, which relied on the victim's testimony, eyewitness accounts, and limited medical evidence showing no injuries to the victim. The …

DAYA SHANKER DUBEY AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P.

The incident occurred on 14 September 1980 in Manaiya village where the deceased Brij Kishore was fatally assaulted with a katwasa and lathi by the accused Daya Shankar, Onkar Nath, Dev Narain and Hiramani, and the injured witness Girija Shankar also sustained injuries. The trial court convicted …

HAKIM SINGHversusSTATE

The appellant Hakim Singh filed a criminal appeal against a judgment of the II Additional Sessions Judge, Shahjahanpur, dated 09.10.1985. No counsel appeared for the appellant, while the State counsel was present. An office report dated 15.09.2026, received in compliance with a prior order, …

SUMAN KUMARIversusSATENDRA KUMAR,DISTRICT BASIK EDUCATION OFFICER

Dismissed on merits

The applicant, Suman Kumari, filed a contempt application before the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad against Satendra Kumar, the District Basik Education Officer. During the hearing, counsel for the applicant, Harish Chandra Pratap, informed the court that the contempt application had become …

RAM ASARE SETHversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The applicant, Ram Asare Seth, filed an application under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code (No. 2266 of 2019) seeking relief against the State of U.P. and another. The matter was listed before the High Court, but the applicant failed to appear, even after being listed on the revised list. …

DALIP KUMARversusSTATE OF U.P.

The appellant, Dalip Kumar, filed a criminal appeal against the State of U.P. However, the court was informed through an office report dated 15 September 2026 that the appellant had died, as per a report from the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Agra dated 8 July 2026. Consequently, the court held that …

SANTOSH KUMAR SAXENAversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANR

The applicant filed an application under Section 482 of the CrPC seeking to quash Criminal Case No. 1137 of 2010 (State vs. Santosh Kumar Saxena), which involved offences under Sections 406, 420, 467, 468 and 471 IPC. The parties had reached a compromise, which was verified by the trial court as …

AJAY KUMAR GUPTAversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The applicant filed an application under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code in 2019 seeking relief in a criminal matter. The matter was listed before the High Court but no counsel appeared on behalf of the applicant, even after a revised list. The learned Additional Government Advocate …

AJAY KUMAR GUPTAversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

Ajay Kumar Gupta filed an application under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code in 2019, seeking relief against the State of U.P. and another party. No counsel appeared on behalf of the applicant when the matter was called, and the application had remained pending for several years. The High …

M/S DIKSHA CONSTRUCTIONversusUNION OF INDIA AND 4 OTHERS

M/S Diksha Construction filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing the Union of India and other railway authorities to provide the drawing for a railway tender work and to decide the petitioner’s pending representations. The respondents indicated that the work had been dropped following a …

SAGAR AND 4 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioners filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition in the Allahabad High Court seeking a writ of certiorari to quash FIR No. 31/2026 dated 19.01.2026, which alleged offences under Sections 85, 115(2), 351(3), 352, 109 of the B.N.S. and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, and …

STATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERSversusPRESIDING OFFICER, LABOUR COURT AND ANOTHER

The State of U.P. Irrigation Department challenged a Labour Court award dated 29‑07‑2020 that reinstated a former chowkidar and ordered full back wages, asserting that his services were terminated on 1 January 1993. The award was based on a finding that the respondent had worked more than 240 days …

SMT. PRABHAVATIversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 6 OTHERS

Petitioner Smt. Prabhavati filed a writ petition seeking mandamus directing the State of U.P. and other respondents to consider her representation dated 27 January 2026 within a stipulated period, and also sought the same against private individuals Ram Pratap, Krishna Pratap and Prabhavati. The …

STATE OF U.P. THROUGH MAGISTRATE AND 3 OTHERSversusYASIN

The State of Uttar Pradesh filed an application seeking condonation of delay in filing a review petition against a 2014 judgment in Yasin v. State of U.P. The Special Leave Petition (Civil) against that judgment was dismissed on 26 November 2019, but the review petition was only filed on 25 March …

DESHVEER AND 30 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioners filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking a writ of certiorari to quash an FIR dated 23.01.2025 and a writ of mandamus to restrain their arrest under provisions of the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 and the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984. They argued that …

DEVENDRA KUMAR NAGARIAversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 4 OTHERS

Petitioner Devendra Kumar Nagaria filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition before the Allahabad High Court. No counsel appeared on behalf of the petitioner even after a revised call, while the learned Additional Government Advocate for the State was present. The Court held that the petition …

GIREESH CHANDRA AGARWALversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 4 OTHERS

A criminal miscellaneous writ petition (No. 3628 of 2025) was filed by Gireesh Chandra Agarwal against the State of U.P. and others. No counsel appeared on behalf of the petitioner even after a revised call, while the State's AGA was present. The Court held that the petition could not proceed due to …

VOSIYAR YADAVversusSTATE OF UP AND 3 OTHERS

Petitioner Vosiyar Yadav filed Criminal Miscellaneous Writ Petition No. 3944 of 2025 before the Allahabad High Court seeking relief against the State of Uttar Pradesh and three others. The petition was listed, but the petitioner failed to appear before the Court, while the respondent’s Additional …

MOHIUDDEEN AND 3 OTHERSversusTHE STATE OF U.P. AND 4 OTHERS

The petitioners challenged a revision order of the Uttar Pradesh Board of Revenue that set aside a 1982 decree and subsequent orders relating to a land dispute under the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act. The Board had remitted the matter for fresh adjudication without summoning the …

JATINDER URF JITENDRAversusSTATE OF UP AND 3 OTHERS

The writ petition filed by Jatinder Urf Jitendra was listed before the High Court of Allahabad. No counsel appeared on behalf of the petitioner, while the State's Additional Government Advocate and counsel for one respondent were present. The Court observed the absence of the petitioner’s …

RAJ KUMARI @ PRIYANKA AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioners filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking (i) quash of an FIR dated 05.02.2025 under Section 87 of the Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023, (ii) a mandamus directing the police not to arrest them, (iii) a mandamus directing certain respondents to take action against a fourth …

SEEMA PANDEYversusUNION OF INDIA AND 4 OTHERY

Seema Pandey filed Criminal Miscellaneous Writ Petition No. 3914 of 2025 before the Allahabad High Court seeking relief against the Union of India and four others. The petitioner failed to appear before the Court, while the respondent's Additional Government Advocate was present. The Court observed …

SANDEEP AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioners filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking a certiorari to quash an FIR dated 06.02.2026 and a mandamus directing the police not to arrest them. No counsel appeared for the petitioners, and the State was represented by learned A.G.A. S.N. Tiwari. The court noted an office …

SHIKHA AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioners filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking a certiorari to quash an FIR dated 03.02.2026 under Section 137(2) B.N.S. 2023 and a mandamus directing the respondents not to arrest them. The State, through its A.G.A., informed the court that the investigation was complete and …

RAMESH CHANDRA GUPTAversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 4 OTHERS

The petitioner filed Criminal Miscellaneous Writ Petition No. 4443 of 2025 before the Allahabad High Court seeking relief against the State of U.P. and four others. No counsel appeared on behalf of the petitioner even after a revised call, while the learned Additional Government Advocate for the …

SMT SHAHIN AND 6 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioners filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition in the Allahabad High Court seeking (i) a certiorari to quash an FIR dated 12‑02‑2026 registered under Sections 87 and 351(2) of the B.N.S., (ii) a mandamus directing the police not to arrest them while the petition is pending, and (iii) a …

DEEPAK JAIN AND 2 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioners Deepak Jain and two others filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition before the Allahabad High Court. No counsel appeared on behalf of the petitioners to address the court, although the Attorney General for the State was present. The court, noting the lack of prosecution, …

SHAHZADversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioners filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition in the Allahabad High Court seeking a writ of certiorari to quash an FIR dated 04‑02‑2026 (Case Crime No.0034 of 2026) and a writ of mandamus directing the police not to arrest them. The FIR was registered under Sections 64, 89, 316(2) and …

PRADEEP KUMAR AND 2 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The applicants filed an application under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code seeking to quash the summons and the entire criminal proceeding (Case No. 28190 of 2017) involving offences under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 of the IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. The State, …

YASHWANT SINGHversusPRIYANKA SINGH

Yashwant Singh filed a first appeal against Priyanka Singh in the Allahabad High Court. The appellant was represented by counsel Vinod Kumar Yadav, while no counsel was listed for the respondent. The appellant’s counsel failed to take any procedural steps to advance the appeal. The Court observed …

VIMLESH TIWARIversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The applicant, Vimlesh Tiwari, filed an application under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code seeking to quash the charge sheet and cognizance order in Criminal Case No. 28328 of 2021, which involved offences under Sections 147, 148, 149, 352, 504, 506 IPC and Section 7 of the Criminal Law …

RAMESHWAR DAYALversusHAR NATH SINGH

The petitioner, Rameshwar Dayal, filed a writ petition before the Allahabad High Court. No further steps were taken to prosecute the petition. The Court observed that there was nothing for it to consider and dismissed the petition for want of prosecution. Consequently, any interim order that may …

PHOOL KUMAR SAINIversusMAHENDRA SINGH SAINI

Phool Kumar Saini filed a writ petition (Writ‑A No. 27534 of 2012) before the Allahabad High Court against Mahendra Singh Saini. The petition was listed but the petitioner failed to appear or otherwise prosecute the petition. The Court observed that there was no appearance to press the petition. …

UTTAR PRADESH STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATIONversusSRI RAM BAHADUR AND ANOTHER

Disposed off/Decided on merits

The Uttar Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation (UPSRTC) challenged a Labour Court award that declared the termination of driver Sri Ram Bahadur on 29‑09‑2012 illegal and ordered his reinstatement with full back wages. UPSRTC argued that the Labour Court exceeded its jurisdiction by re‑examining …

SMT. BHARATI GUPTAversusSRI SHANKAR SAHAI BAJPAYEE

The petitioner, Smt. Bharati Gupta, filed a revision under S.C.C. Revision Defective No. 166 of 2016 seeking condonation of delay in a civil matter. An application for condoning the delay (Application No. 239934 of 2016) was listed but no counsel appeared on behalf of the petitioner to argue the …

NARENDRA KUMAR JAISWALversusGANGA RAM

The petitioner Narendra Kumar Jaiswal filed writ petition No. 24372 of 2010 before the Allahabad High Court seeking relief against respondent Ganga Ram. The petition was listed and counsel for the petitioner was Rajesh Kumar Mishra. No appearance was made by the petitioner or his counsel to press …

SUBHASH CHANDRAversusANZAR ALI

Subhash Chandra filed a writ petition (Writ‑A No. 51080 of 2012) before the Allahabad High Court against Anzar Ali. The petition was listed but no counsel appeared on behalf of the petitioner to press the case. Consequently, the Court noted the lack of prosecution of the petition. The Court …

SHAGUFTA PARVEEN AND ORS.versusADDL.DISTRICT JUDGE AND OTHERS

The petitioners filed Writ A No. 11447 of 2013 before the Allahabad High Court. No counsel appeared on behalf of the petitioners to press the petition. Consequently, the Court dismissed the petition for want of prosecution. The interim order that had been granted earlier was vacated. No substantive …

SMT.USHA GUPTAversusSMT.URMILA SHUKLA AND ORS.

Smt. Usha Gupta filed a writ petition (Writ‑A No. 12464 of 2013) against Smt. Urmila Shukla and others in the Allahabad High Court. No counsel appeared on behalf of the petitioner to press the petition. The Court observed that the petition was not prosecuted and therefore dismissed it. The earlier …

GOPAL PRASAD SHARMAversusBHARAT KUMAR VERMA AND OTHERS

The petitioners, Gopal Prasad Sharma, filed a writ petition (Writ‑A No. 13199 of 2013) before the Allahabad High Court seeking relief against the respondents, Bharat Kumar Verma and others. The petition was listed and counsel for the petitioners, Ajay Kumar Pathak and Kripa Shanker Singh, were …

SMT. ASGHARI KHATOON AND ANOTHERversusGAYA PRASAD

The revision petition filed by Smt. Asghari Khatoon and another against Gaya Prasad was heard before the Allahabad High Court. The petitioners failed to prosecute the revision, and consequently the court dismissed the revision for want of prosecution. The court also vacated any interim order that …

SMT. JYOTI JAISWAL AND 2 ORSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The petitioners filed an application under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code in 2019 seeking relief. The matter was listed before the High Court but the petitioners failed to appear, even after a revised list. The State, represented by the learned Additional Government Advocate, was …

NISHU SOLANKI AND 4 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

Petitioners filed a writ petition seeking the quash of an FIR dated 05.04.2025 under Sections 498-A, 323, 506, 354 of the IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, and a mandamus directing the State not to arrest them. The petition was referred to the Mediation and Conciliation Centre, …

M/S SVARRNIM INFRASTRUCTURES PVT. LTD.versusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioner, M/s Svarrnim Infrastructures Pvt. Ltd., filed a writ petition (Writ No. 31488 of 2021) before the Allahabad High Court. The petitioner later expressed a desire not to pursue the petition and applied for its withdrawal. The respondent State of U.P. and others, through their counsel, …

VEERU VISHWAKARMA @ VEER BAHADUR VISHWAKARMAversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The High Court considered an appeal by Veeru Vishwakarma under Section 14‑A(2) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act seeking bail after a Special Judge had refused it. The FIR alleged that Vishwakarma fired at Deepak and Pankaj Sonkar, causing injuries, but …

KHURSHID AHMED AND 3 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The applicants filed a petition under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code seeking to quash the order of the Additional Sessions Judge that had affirmed a magistrate's summons against them under Sections 498‑A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. Both parties …

KHURSHID AHMED AND 5 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P AND ANOTHER

The applicants filed a petition under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code seeking to quash a criminal revision order that had affirmed a magistrate's summons under Section 406 of the IPC and Section 6 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. Both parties testified that they had settled their matrimonial …

SAURABH KUMAR AND 4 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioners filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking a certiorari to quash an FIR dated 12.03.2025 under sections 498-A, 313, 323, 504, 506 of the IPC and sections 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, and a mandamus directing the police not to arrest them. No counsel appeared for the …

SMT. PALLAVI VERMAversusSRI SACHIN VERMA

The applicant, Smt. Pallavi Verma, filed a transfer application under Section 13(1)(1a) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, seeking to move her divorce proceedings from the Family Court in Gautam Buddh Nagar to the Family Court in Aligarh. She resides in Aligarh with her minor daughter and aged …

RAM PRATAP SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

Ram Pratap Singh filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking a writ of certiorari to quash an FIR dated 10‑04‑2025 under sections 419, 420, 467 and 468 of the Indian Penal Code, and a writ of mandamus to restrain his arrest. The petitioner’s counsel did not appear before the High Court, …

JATIN @ JEETUversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

Petitioner Jatin @ Jeetu filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking a writ of certiorari to quash an FIR dated 16-04-2025 and a writ of prohibition to restrain his arrest under Sections 406 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code. The petitioner’s counsel did not appear before the bench, while …

FARHANA ALIAS FARANAversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioner, Farhana Alias Farana, filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition (No. 8923 of 2025) in the Allahabad High Court. The court later discovered that the original physical record of the petition had been inadvertently misplaced. The court directed the office to locate the original …

SANTOSH KUMAR AWASTHIversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 4 OTHERS

Petitioner Santosh Kumar Awasthi filed a writ petition before the Allahabad High Court. The petition suffered multiple adjournments due to the counsel's repeated illness, and on the scheduled date of 16 September 2026 no counsel or representative appeared. The Court noted that the petitioner had not …

ANAND KUMAR AGRAWALversusUNION OF INDIA AND 2 OTHERS

The applicant, Anand Kumar Agrawal, filed an application under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code seeking relief. During the hearing, counsel for the applicant informed the court that the application had become infructuous. The court accepted this submission and dismissed the application on …

ABHISHEK SHUKLA AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The applicants filed an application under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code seeking to quash the summoning order and the entire criminal proceeding (Complaint Case No. 445 of 2014) arising under Sections 386 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code. The applicants claimed that they had reached an …

MOHD. ASIF AND 2 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P.AND ANOTHER

The applicants filed an application under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code seeking to quash the charge sheet dated 8 May 2019 and the cognizance order dated 17 September 2019 in a criminal case involving offences under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and Sections 3/4 of the Dowry …

SHIV MILAN SINGH (DRIVER)versusRINKI SINGH AND 4 OTHERS

The appellant, Shiv Milan Singh, filed a withdrawal application seeking to withdraw the pending FAFO (First Appeal From Order). The court heard the application and allowed the withdrawal. Consequently, the FAFO was dismissed as withdrawn. No substantive merits of the original dispute were addressed. …

NIZAMversusUNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER

The petitioner, Nizam, filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing the Regional Passport Officer, Lucknow, to issue his passport within a court‑specified time. The respondents, Union of India and the Regional Passport Officer, submitted instructions indicating that two criminal cases were …

JAILAL RAJBHARversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court considered a third bail application filed by Jailal Rajbhar, who has been in custody since July 2019 for alleged offences under Sections 302 and 498-A IPC. The applicant argued that the trial had been delayed for over seven years, with only six of ten witnesses examined, and that the …

RAJ KUMARI DEVIversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

Petitioner Raj Kumari Devi filed a writ petition seeking to quash a District Magistrate's order dated 7 September 2024 that rejected her claim for Rs.5 lakh under the Mukhyamantri Krishak Durghatna Kalyan Yojna on the ground that the claim was time‑barred. She also prayed for a mandamus directing …

NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY OF INDIAversusARVIND KUMAR AND 5 OTHERS

The National Highway Authority of India (NHAI) filed a civil revision seeking to set aside an order of the Additional District Judge that directed the petitioners, Arvind Kumar and others, to deposit an enhanced award arising from a land acquisition proceeding. The award, originally passed under the …

SHUBHAM YADAVversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The appellant, Shubham Yadav, was convicted under Sections 69, 89, 352, 351(3) of the IPC and several provisions of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act for allegedly forcing a pregnancy termination and using caste slurs. He appealed the denial of bail by the …

NIRMAL KUMARversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court considered a bail application filed by Nirmal Kumar, who was charged under Sections 103(1), 238 and 3(5) of the Indian Penal Code for alleged murder. The applicant argued that the FIR allegations were false, the informant was not an eye‑witness, and CCTV footage showed only a …

SANJAY KUMAR GONDversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioner, Sanjay Kumar Gond, challenged the rejection of his application for a caste certificate on the ground that the Scrutiny Committee failed to consider a 6 May 2020 report from the Backward Class Welfare Directorate indicating that his father belongs to the Scheduled Tribe Gond. The …

VIKAS KUMARversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The High Court considered an anticipatory bail application filed by Vikas Kumar under Section 482 of the CrPC in connection with Complaint Case No. 2452 of 2024, which alleged offences under IPC Sections 323, 307/34, and 506. The applicant claimed false implication, had no prior criminal record, and …

NISHA DEVI AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioners, Nisha Devi and another, filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition challenging the investigation and charge-sheet filed against them. The State of U.P. informed the court that the investigation was complete and a charge-sheet had been submitted on 19-06-2026. The petitioners did …

RENU RAI AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioners, Renu Rai and another, filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition before the Allahabad High Court challenging the proceedings against them. During the hearing, the petitioners’ counsel informed the court that the investigation was already completed, a charge‑sheet had been filed, …

NIRDESH KUMARversusUNION OF INDIA AND 2 OTHERS

Petitioner Nirdesh Kumar filed a writ petition under Article 226 seeking a passport valid for ten years as prescribed under the Passports Act, 1967. Respondents argued that, because the petitioner is involved in a criminal case, only a one‑year passport may be issued, subject to a No Objection …

DEV GADARIYA ALIAS DEVENDER AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioners filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking a writ of certiorari to quash an FIR dated 05-07-2025 and a writ of mandamus to restrain their arrest in a cognizable offence. Neither petitioner appeared before the court on the hearing dates, and the State was represented by …

ASHIQUE KHANversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

Petitioners alleged that their vehicles were wrongfully seized by the police and a transport company without proper challans being issued. The respondents contended that the seizure was justified because the vehicles were overloaded by 23 tonnes, had an expired permit, and unpaid road tax, and they …

RAMBHAGAT YADAV @ SHRIRAM YADAV AND 2 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The applicants filed an application under Section 528 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking to quash the chargesheet dated 31‑03‑2024 and the cognizance order dated 26‑11‑2024 in State v. Ram Bhagat Yadav et al., a case under IPC sections 323, 504 and 506 relating to an alleged assault during …

KUNAL MITTAL AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

Petitioners Kunal Mittal and another sought relief concerning a No Objection Certificate (NOC) issued for a plot where they were selected as dealers for a retail outlet. They filed a withdrawal application after the NOC was issued, arguing that the NOC had been wrongly granted and that they faced …

VAHEEDversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The High Court of Allahabad considered an anticipatory bail application filed by Vaheed under Section 482 of the CrPC in connection with a complaint (S.T. No. 38 of 2023) alleging offences under Sections 386, 392 and 506 IPC. Vaheed claimed he was falsely implicated and had already been granted …

RISHABH @ BOBBY YADAVversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The applicant, Rishabh @ Bobby Yadav, sought bail in a criminal case (Crime No. 638 of 2025) alleging offences under Sections 137(2), 87, 65(1) of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 and 4(2) of the POCSO Act. The prosecution alleged that the applicant, being the maternal uncle (phupha) of the …

SONA DEVIversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 4 OTHERS

The petitioner, Sona Devi, filed a writ petition under Article 226 seeking a mandamus directing the respondents to demarcate plot no. 693 belonging to the Gaon Sabha and to remove the illegal possession of private respondent No.5, and also to order respondents No.2 and No.3 to decide an application …

MANISHA TOMAR AND 2 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioners, Manisha Tomar and two others, filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition challenging the investigation and charge-sheet filed against them. The State and one respondent informed the court that the investigation was complete and a charge-sheet had been filed on 30.05.2026. The …

SOMARU PRASAD VERMAversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 6 OTHERS

Somaru Prasad Verma filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing the Assistant Collector to enforce an eviction and damages order dated 24‑08‑2020 passed under Section 122‑B of the U.P. Zilla and Land Revenue Act, 1950. The petitioner alleged that despite the order, the authorities had taken …

ARUN KUMARversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

Arun Kumar filed an application under Section 528 of the Criminal Procedure Code seeking to quash a complaint (Case No. 1789/2023) filed under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act for the dishonour of a cheque. He contended that the cheque was given as security for a venture capital …

ABHAYA NARAYAN UPADHYAYAversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioner, Abhaya Narayan Upadhyaya, filed Criminal Miscellaneous Writ Petition No. 17381 of 2026 before the Allahabad High Court challenging a matter against the State of U.P. and two others. During the hearing, the petitioner's counsel announced at the Bar that the petitioner no longer wished …

KAPIL UPADHYAYAversusSTATE OF U.P.

The Allahabad High Court considered an anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code filed by Kapil Upadhyaya in a case registered under Sections 69, 70(1), 115(2) and 351(3) of the B.N.S. The applicant claimed innocence, highlighted a 23‑day delay in filing the FIR, …

SAHIBversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The applicant sought bail in a criminal case filed under Sections 137(2) and 65(1) of the B.N.S. and Section 3/4(2) of the POCSO Act, alleging false implication. The FIR was lodged three days after the alleged incident, and a medical report dated 22 May 2026 established the victim as a 19‑year‑old …

AMAN KHAN AND 6 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The applicants, Aman Khan and six others, filed an application under Section 528 of the CrPC seeking to quash the charge‑sheet dated 26‑09‑2024, the cognizance order dated 01‑02‑2025, and the entire criminal proceedings (Case No. 2574 of 2025) relating to offences under Sections 191(2), 115(2), 352, …

VIKASversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The High Court considered a bail application filed by Vikas in Crime No. 313 of 2025, charged under Section 351(2) of the B.N.S. and Sections 5m/6 of the POCSO Act. The applicant argued that the FIR was lodged a year after the alleged incident, indicating a fatal delay, and that the victim, a minor, …

BILKIS BANO AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The applicants, Bilkis Bano and another, filed an application under Section 528 of the CrPC seeking to quash the charge‑sheet dated 19‑Nov‑2019 and the cognizance order dated 22‑Apr‑2022 in a criminal case (Case No. 10773 of 2022) relating to alleged criminal breach of trust and intimidation. They …

SMT SAMUNDARI DEVIversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioner, Smt. Samundari Devi, challenged an order dated 23.07.2026 directing demolition of a structure on Plot No. 215 in Greater Noida, alleging that no prior notice was given. The respondents, the State of U.P. and the Greater Noida Authorities, contended that the demolition order itself …

GEETA DEVIversusSTATE OF U.P.

Geeta Devi, a 65‑year‑old woman, was arrested in connection with the murder of her husband under a non‑bailable offence (Criminal Case No. 173 of 2026). She alleged that the accusations were false, claiming the deceased’s habitual liquor consumption led to a family dispute during which her sons …

RANDHIR AND 2 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioners filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking the quash of an FIR dated 24‑05‑2026 that alleged offences under Sections 115(2), 352, 351(2) and 333 of the Bhartiya Nagrika Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. The High Court examined the FIR and held that it disclosed a prima facie …

SMT. NAYANPATIversusSTATE OF U.P AND 3 OTHERS

Petitioner Smt. Nayanpati, through counsel Parv Agarwal, filed a writ petition (Writ C No. 30824 of 2026) before the Allahabad High Court. The petitioner later expressed a desire not to pursue the petition and requested its withdrawal. The court considered the request and, without examining any …

NAGAR PALIKA PARISHAD AONVLA AND ANOTHERversusANUJ KUMAR JHA

The Nagar Palika Parishad, Aonvla filed a contempt application alleging that the respondent, Anuj Kumar Jha, willfully defied the High Court's order dated 01.12.2025 in Writ‑C No. 411 of 2020, which directed the release of 2% additional stamp duty to the local body. The court had previously ordered …

SMT. RIHANAversusSTATE OF U.P.

The Allahabad High Court considered the bail application of Smt. Rihana in NDPS case No. 592 of 2026, where the FIR alleged recovery of 5.108 kg of ganja from her joint possession. The applicant pleaded absolute innocence, contending that the police had falsely implicated her, that the seized …

KHURSHIDversusSTATE OF U.P.

The Allahabad High Court considered a bail application filed by Khurshid in a Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) case where the FIR alleged recovery of 5.108 kg of ganja from his joint possession with a co‑accused. The applicant contended that he was falsely implicated, that the …

NANHEversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The High Court considered a bail application filed by Nanhe in Criminal Case No. 196 of 2026, which involved charges under Sections 137(2), 87, 64 of the IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the POCSO Act. The applicant claimed false implication, pointing out a two‑day delay in filing the FIR and a victim …

SHANI SHARMAversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The High Court considered a bail application filed by Shani Sharma in a case under Sections 137(2), 87 of the CrPC, Section 65(1) of the B.N.S., and Sections 5L/6 of the POCSO Act. The applicant argued that he was not named in the FIR, that the FIR was lodged belatedly, and that there were material …

DEVENDRA SINGH ALIAS CHHOTUversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The applicant, Devendra Singh (alias Chhotu), filed a bail application in Criminal Case No. 492 of 2023, charged under Sections 376, 506, 120B of the IPC and Sections 16, 17, 3, 4 of the POCSO Act. He claimed absolute innocence, argued that no cogent evidence existed against him and that he had …

SMT. ALSABA @ SABA PARVEENversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court considered an anticipatory bail application filed by Smt. Alsaba @ Saba Parveen in Crime No. 786 of 2025, alleging false implication in offences including extortion and a honey‑trap scheme. The applicant claimed innocence, citing a delayed FIR and an earlier complaint she had lodged …

NAND LAL AND ANOTHERversusSHIV NARAYAN THE CHAIR PERSON DISTRICT LEVEL COMMITTEE

The High Court examined a contempt application filed by Nand Lal and another, alleging that the District Level Committee willfully defied the order dated 5 December 2022 in Writ‑C No. 33717/2022, which required the petitioners to make a representation before the Collector and for the Collector to …

VIJAY SINGH NAGARversusMRS. GEETA CHAUDHARY, DISTRICT BASIC EDUCATION OFFICER

Vijay Singh Nagar filed a contempt application against Mrs. Geeta Chaudhary, alleging willful disobedience of a judgment dated 11‑03‑2026 in Writ‑A No. 57124 of 2017 (Mool Chand Sharma v. State of U.P. & 4 others). The applicant claimed the order was served but not complied with. The court observed …

RAJKUMAR VERMAversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The High Court considered a bail application filed by Rajkumar Verma in a criminal case (Crime No. 318 of 2026) involving offences under Sections 115(2), 351(3) of the B.N.S., 5(m)/6 of the P.O.C.S.O. Act and 3(2)(v) of the S.C./S.T. Act. The applicant pleaded innocence, arguing that the FIR was …

ANUPAM BANERJEEversusUNION OF INDIA AND 4 OTHERS

The petitioner was denied a fresh passport on the ground that a criminal case (Case Crime No. 753 of 2009) was pending, although the investigating officer had submitted a final/closure report which the magistrate had accepted on 27‑07‑2010 and no charge sheet was filed. The petitioner argued that, …

DEV NARAYAN CHAUHANversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 5 OTHERS

The petitioner, Dev Narayan Chauhan, filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing the removal of a poultry farm operated by respondents 5 and 6, alleging severe pollution, and also sought an order compelling the District Magistrate to decide his complaint within a fixed period. The court …

PRAKASH CHANDRA YADAVversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 5 OTHERS

The District Magistrate/District Election Officer of Prayagraj shifted polling stations 145‑147 from Prathmik Vidyalay Kolhuwa to Prathmik Vidyalay Jethupur Khas by an order dated 18‑03‑2021, acting on directions issued in response to a representation filed by three Gram Sabha members. The …

VIKASH @ TILLARversusSTATE OF U.P.

Vikash @ Tillar applied for bail in a case involving offences under Sections 126(2), 352, 115(2), 103(1), 3(5), 61(2) of the BNS Act and Sections 3, 25, 27 of the Arms Act. The applicant had already had two earlier bail applications rejected and had been in judicial custody for about thirteen …

ARIF @ MOHD AREEB AND ANOTHERversusState of UP AND ANOTHER

The applicants filed an application under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code seeking to quash the charge sheet dated 28‑02‑2024, the cognizance and summoning order dated 03‑05‑2024, and the entire proceedings in Criminal Case No. 480 of 2024 (State vs Hamad @ Hamdu Maya & Ors). They alleged …

FAIYAZ HUSAINversusUNION OF INDIA AND 5 OTHER

The petitioner, Faiyaz Husain, challenged an order of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Faridpur, Bareilly, which stayed a summoning order in Criminal Case No.1523 of 2025 but failed to issue a No Objection Certificate (NOC) required for obtaining a passport and travelling abroad. The Court examined …

SANJAY BHARTIversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 6 OTHERS

The petitioner, Sanjay Bharti, filed a writ petition under Article 226 seeking a mandamus directing the State of U.P. and others to consider and decide his representations dated 22.01.2026 and 04.06.2026 with a reasoned order. The respondents submitted instructions indicating that the representation …

SMT ARCHANA GUPTA AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 6 OTHERS

The petitioners purchased a property from the original owner, Hari Singh Kushwaha, after a decree of permanent prohibitory injunction was passed against Om Prakash in 2021. Om Prakash appealed the decree, and while his second appeal was pending, the court ordered that no third‑party rights could be …

AMAN NAGPALversusNAMAN JAIN AND ANOTHER

The petitioners (revisionists) filed a civil revision (No. 86 of 2026) before the Allahabad High Court challenging an earlier order. During the hearing, counsel for the revisionists informed the court that they no longer wished to pursue the revision and sought to withdraw it. The court considered …

RAJENDRA PRASAD BHASKAR AND 2 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The applicants filed an application under Section 528 of the B.N.S.S. Act seeking to quash the charge sheet and cognizance order in Criminal Case No. 2307 of 2025, which arose from a complaint under Sections 498‑A, 323, 506 IPC and Sections 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. The applicants and the …

VISHAL SAHNI AND 2 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The applicants filed an application under Section 528 of the B.N.S.S. seeking to quash a charge sheet and criminal proceedings (Case No. 62816 of 2022) arising from alleged offences under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and Sections 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. They claimed that they had …

PROPRIETOR SHIV KUMAR OFFICE MANDAULI GAGARHversusSMT. MAYA DEVI AND 2 OTHERS

The appellant owned a dumper driven by Gaurav Kumar, who died from electrocution while attempting to free the vehicle. The Employees' Compensation Commissioner awarded Rs.16,89,150 to the deceased's mother, despite the appellant's claim that Rs.3 lakh had already been paid privately to the father. …

PRATAP KUMARversusSTATE OF U.P.

The applicant, Pratap Kumar, was arrested in connection with a murder that allegedly occurred during a sudden dispute at a marriage function, where he is said to have struck the deceased with a bracelet. The FIR and several eyewitness statements identify him as the assailant, but a video clip shows …

JAY SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P.

The Allahabad High Court considered a bail application filed by Jay Singh, who has been in custody for over eight years pending trial for murder with ransom under Sections 302, 34 and 364A, 34 of the IPC. The applicant argued that the prolonged pre‑trial detention violated his fundamental right to a …

RAVINDRA RAIversusUNION OF INDIA AND 5 OTHERS

Petitioner Ravindra Rai filed a writ petition under Article 226 seeking disposal of his pending passport application. The respondents argued that the petitioner had been served a show‑cause notice because of several criminal cases pending against him under the Indian Penal Code, the Scheduled Castes …

SHAMA PARVEENversusSTATE OF U.P.

Shama Parveen applied for bail in a case under Sections 3, 5 and 8 of the U.P. Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act. The court noted that a co‑accused, Shaista, had already been released on bail in a similar case and that the applicant had no prior criminal record. After hearing counsel for both sides, …

MOHAMMAD ESAversusUNION OF INDIA AND 5 OTHERS

Petitioner Mohammad Esa filed a writ petition under Article 226 seeking the disposal of his pending application for a fresh passport. The respondents informed the Court that a show‑cause notice had been issued to the petitioner in a criminal case (Case Crime No. 0531 of 2023) under Sections 3 and 25 …

SMT UMESH SHARMAversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioner, Smt. Umesh Sharma, filed a writ petition before the Allahabad High Court and subsequently sought to withdraw it, intending to file a fresh petition with the correct parties. The respondent State of U.P. and two other respondents, through their counsel, raised no objection to the …

NEETA NISHADversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 6 OTHERS

The petitioner, Neeta Nishad, filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking a direction to the State of Uttar Pradesh and others to conduct a fair investigation in Crime No. 121 of 2026, which falls under Sections 115(2), 352 and 351(3) of the BNS. The petitioner alleged that the …

ISTEKHARversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The applicant, Istekhar, sought bail in a criminal case (Crime No. 057 of 2026) under Sections 103(1) and 3(5) BNS of the Criminal Procedure Code. He argued that the FIR named him and four others, but the prosecution’s case relied solely on statements of two informants who were not eye‑witnesses, …

ABID PRADHANversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The applicant Abid Pradhan filed an application under Section 528 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) seeking to quash an order dated 07‑08‑2026 passed by the Special Chief Judicial Magistrate, Prayagraj, in Crime No.73 of 2026 and to appear through video‑conferencing. The applicant …

RAM CHANDRAversusSTATE OF UP AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioner filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking a mandamus directing the police to conduct a fair, proper and impartial investigation in a case under Sections 74, 333, 115(2) BN.S. 2023 and Sections 7 and 8 of the POCSO Act. The State, through the Additional Advocate General, …

RASTRIYA SANRACHNA SEVA SANSTHANversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 6 OTHERS

The petitioner, Rastriya Sanrachna Seva Sansthan, filed Writ Petition No. 14265 of 2026 before the Allahabad High Court. During the proceedings, the petitioner's counsel, Vikesh Kumar Tiwari, moved the Court for withdrawal of the petition. The Court examined the request and found no objection to the …

AMAN CHAUHANversusUNION OF INDIA AND 5 OTHERS

The petitioner, Aman Chauhan, filed a writ petition under Article 226 seeking the disposal of his pending application for a fresh passport. The respondents, including the Union of India, issued a show‑cause notice because a criminal case (Case Crime No. 0319 of 2025) is pending against the …

KSHITIJ GUPTAversusDHARAMRAJ RAM

The Writ Court had issued an order on 02.02.2026 in Writ‑C No. 3748 of 2026 directing the removal of an encroachment. The applicant, Kshitij Gupta, filed a contempt application alleging non‑compliance of that order. The applicant’s counsel, Mohit Verma, submitted a compliance affidavit stating that …

MOHAMMAD YAKUBversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 4 OTHERS

The petitioner, Mohammad Yakub, sought relief against eviction from premises allotted to him. The respondents, including the State of U.P. and a Krishi Utpadan Mandi Samiti, produced instructions indicating the premises had been used, undermining the petitioner's claim. The petitioner requested time …

VARISversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The High Court of Allahabad considered an anticipatory bail application filed by Varis under Section 482 of the CrPC in connection with a case under Sections 2 and 3 of the U.P. Gangsters and Anti‑Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986. The applicant claimed he was falsely implicated, noting that …

PRIYANSHU PANWARversusUNION OF INDIA AND 5 OTHER

The petitioner filed a writ petition under Article 226 seeking re‑issuance of his passport with the date of birth corrected to match his High School Certificate. He alleged that the passport issued in 2014 contained an incorrect date of birth and that his subsequent application for correction was …

KALLUversusSTATE OF U.P.

The applicant, Kallu, filed a second bail petition (Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 30980 of 2026) after his first bail petition (No. 6069/2026) had been dismissed on 2 July 2026. He is charged under IPC sections 103(1), 351(3), 352 and under sections 3, 25 and 27 of the Arms Act for offences …

ASHOK KUMAR JAINversusSENIOR MANAGER

The petitioner, Ashok Kumar Jain, received a notice for non‑payment of water‑connection installation charges and paid the amount under protest, claiming that only one connection was provided and the charge for a second connection was erroneous. He filed a representation on 1 July 2026 seeking …

RAHUL YADAVversusUNION OF INDIA AND 6 OTHERS

Petitioner Rahul Yadav, who had been issued a passport valid for one year due to his involvement in a criminal case, sought a ten‑year passport as prescribed under the Passport Act, 1967. The trial court had earlier granted a No Objection Certificate (NOC) with a rider limiting the passport to a …

AMARJEETversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioner, Amarjeet, filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution seeking disposal of a pending reply dated 08.08.2026 to a notice issued on 05.08.2026. The petitioner had also applied for the supply of certain documents to enable an effective reply. The Court observed that the …

ADARSHversusSTATE OF UP AND ANOTHER

The applicant filed an application under Section 528 of the BNSS seeking to set aside a removal order dated 06‑04‑2023 passed by the Special Judge under the POXSO Act in Gorakhpur, arising from case No. 390/2018 (Vivad No. 979/2023). The applicant contended that the order was issued without any …

ABHISHEK GUPTA AND 6 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

Petitioners, a group of six individuals, filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution seeking a mandamus directing the Uttar Pradesh State Medical Faculty, Lucknow to register their Bachelor of Physiotherapy degrees. The petitioners argued that the matter was not res integra because …

BASANTversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 5 OTHERS

Petitioner Basant filed a writ petition under Article 226 seeking a mandamus directing the respondents, particularly respondents 2 and 3, to provide police protection at his house and to evict respondents 5 and 6 who were alleged to have taken illegal possession of his property. The petition also …

BHANTU @ MANTU KUMARversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court considered an anticipatory bail application filed by Bhantu @ Mantu Kumar under CrPC Section 482 in a case involving alleged assault and injuries under several IPC sections. The applicant claimed false implication, noting that the FIR assigned only a general role to him and that the …

X MINORversusSTATE OF U.P.

The applicant, a minor, filed an anticipatory bail application in a case (Crime No. 54 of 2026) where he was named among eight accused for alleged assault causing injuries that were not dangerous to life. He claimed false implication, noting that the FIR only assigned a general role to him and that …

FARMAN AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The High Court of Allahabad entertained an anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code filed by Farman and Asik, who were named in an FIR for alleged assault. The applicants argued that the FIR only ascribed a general role to them, the injuries sustained by the …

ALOK RAJPUTversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

Alok Rajput filed an application under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) seeking to set aside the charge‑sheet (M.A. No. 190/2026) and the notice and order dated 21 July 2026 issued by the Special Judge, Poxo Act/Additional Sessions Judge, Kanpur Nagar, in a case under …

AMAN RAIversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

Petitioner Aman Rai, an employee of RBL Finserve Pvt. Ltd., filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition challenging an FIR dated 20-07-2026 registered under Section 316(5) B.N.S. (referred to as Section 409 IPC). He alleged that the FIR was belated, lacked specific details, and was based solely on …

SHIVRAJ SINGH YADAVversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The High Court considered an anticipatory bail application filed by Shivraj Singh Yadav, an 85‑year‑old accused in a case under Sections 74, 351(3) of the BNS Act and Sections 9m/10 of the POCSO Act for alleged molestation of a seven‑year‑old. The applicant argued that his advanced age and medical …

MOHITversusSTATE OF U.P.

The applicant, Mohit, was arrested in Crime No. 555 of 2026 under Sections 2 and 3 of the Uttar Pradesh Gangster and Anti‑Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, and has been in custody since 5 August 2026. He contended that the prosecution was based on a single entry in a gang chart, that he had …

RAJ KUMARversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioner, Raj Kumar, filed Writ No. 35526 of 2026 before the Allahabad High Court. Subsequently, the petitioner expressed a desire not to pursue the petition and requested its withdrawal. The standing counsel for the State of U.P. raised no objection to the withdrawal. The Court, after noting …

X JUVENILEversusSTATE OF UP

The High Court considered an anticipatory bail application filed by X, a minor, who alleged false inclusion in an FIR relating to violent incidents. The applicant, represented by counsel Abhishek Mishra, argued lack of criminal antecedents and pointed to a similar co-accused, Saurabh Chauhan, who …

BHAGAT SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

Bhagat Singh filed a revision petition under Section 41(3) of the U.P. Urban Planning and Development Act, 1973, seeking a speedy decision. The respondents agreed that the revision should be decided expeditiously. The Court, without examining the merits, directed that the revision be decided as soon …

MOHIT CHAUHANversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

Mohit Chauhan filed an application under Section 528 of the B.N.S.S. seeking to quash a summoning order dated 10‑04‑2019 and a non‑bailable warrant dated 03‑10‑2019 issued by the Additional Court, Aligarh in a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (Kuldeep Singh v. Mohit …

SMT REENA PATELversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND 4 OTHERS

Petitioner Smt Reena Patel filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution seeking a mandamus directing the State authorities to decide a representation dated 25‑08‑2026 within a time frame fixed by the Court. The Court examined whether such a direction could be granted as a writ remedy. …

AVNEESH KUMAR YADAV AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF UP AND ANOTHER

The applicants, Avneesh Kumar Yadav and another, filed an application under Section 528 of the BNSS Act seeking to quash Criminal Case No. 909 of 2025, which involved charges under IPC sections 498‑A, 504, 506 and the Dowry Prohibition Act sections 3 and 4. The parties had amicably settled the …

UBAISHversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The applicant filed an application under Section 528 of the CrPC seeking quash of criminal proceedings (Case No. 2617 of 2026) arising from Crime No. 640 of 2025, which involved offences under Sections 352, 115(2) and 351(3) of the IPC. The parties had earlier filed a writ petition and, following …

MOHD BILAL ISMAIL AND 2 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 4 OTHERS

Petitioners Mohd Bilal Ismail and two others filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus to restrain a respondent and police from interfering with a boundary-raising activity on their land, and to compel the District Magistrate to decide a representation dated 16 September 2025. The petitioners limited …