Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Judgments of 2026

15781 judgments · newest first · showing 9601–9800

RINKU DIWAKER AND 5 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioners filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition challenging the FIR filed against them. The State, represented by the learned Additional Government Advocate, submitted an office report dated 04.05.2026 indicating that a charge-sheet had already been filed by the Director General of …

AMAN AND 7 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioners filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition challenging the registration of the FIR. The State, represented by the Additional Government Advocate, submitted an office report dated 04.05.2026 indicating that a charge-sheet had already been filed by the Director General of Police, …

MURTAZA HUSSAIN AND 3 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioners filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition challenging the registration of an FIR. The State, represented by the learned Additional Government Advocate, submitted an office report dated 04.05.2026 indicating that a charge-sheet had already been filed in the matter. The Court noted …

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

The petitioners filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition challenging the registration of an FIR. The State, represented by the Additional Government Advocate, submitted an office report indicating that a charge-sheet had already been filed in the matter. The Court noted that the filing of a …

BHOOP SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioner, Bhoop Singh, filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition in the Allahabad High Court challenging the FIR lodged against him. The State, represented by the Additional Government Advocate, submitted a report indicating that the charge-sheet had already been filed by the Director …

KANHAIYA LAL @ KRISHANA BAGHEL AND 4 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioners filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition challenging the registration of an FIR. The State, represented by the Additional Government Advocate, submitted an office report dated 04.05.2026 indicating that a charge-sheet had already been filed in the matter. The Court observed that …

DHIRENDRA KUMARversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioner filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition challenging the registration of the FIR against him. The State, represented by its learned Additional Government Advocate, submitted that a charge-sheet had already been filed, as per a report dated 04.05.2026 from the Legal Cell of the …

VIJAY KRISHNA GOELversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioner filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition challenging the registration of an FIR. The State, represented by the learned Additional Government Advocate, submitted an office report indicating that a charge-sheet had already been filed in the matter. The Court noted that the filing of …

MANOJ KUMAR PATEL AND 5 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

Petitioners filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition against the State of Uttar Pradesh. The petitioners' counsel argued that the petition had become infructuous because a police report had already been filed in the matter. The petition sought dismissal of the writ on that ground. The High Court …

GULZAR AND 5 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioners filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition challenging the registration of an FIR. The State, represented by the learned Additional Government Advocate, submitted an office report dated 04.05.2026 indicating that a charge-sheet had already been filed in the case. The Court observed …

DIWAKAR SHARMAversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioners Diwakar Sharma filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition in the Allahabad High Court challenging the registration of the FIR against them. The State, represented by the learned Additional Government Advocate, submitted an office report dated 4 May 2026 indicating that the …

FARMAN AND 4 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

Petitioners filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition in the Allahabad High Court challenging the registration of an FIR. The State, represented by the learned Additional Government Advocate, submitted an office report indicating that a charge-sheet had already been filed in the case. The Court …

REETA CHAUBEY AND 4 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioners filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition challenging the registration of an FIR. The State, represented by the Additional Government Advocate, submitted an office report dated 04.05.2026 indicating that a charge-sheet had already been filed in the matter. The Court observed that …

VIKRAM MEHTAversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The applicant, Vikram Mehta, filed an application under Section 528 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking a specific relief. The application was listed before the Hon'ble Justice Sanjay Kumar Pachori. No counsel appeared on behalf of the applicant to pursue the matter, although the learned …

MOHD. SALEEM AND 9 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The petitioners, Mohd. Saleem and nine others, filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from potential arrest. The State, represented by the Additional Government Advocate, informed the court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken …

SURESH CHANDRA VERMA AND 9 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioners filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition challenging the registration of an FIR. The State, represented by the learned Additional Government Advocate, submitted an office report indicating that a charge‑sheet had already been filed in the matter. The Court observed that once a …

SHATRUGHNA SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioner Shatrughna Singh filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition challenging the registration of the FIR against him. The State, represented by the learned Additional Government Advocate, submitted an office report dated 04.05.2026 indicating that a charge-sheet had already been filed by …

OBAID AHMADversusSRI. SATYENDRA KUMAR, DISTRICT MAGISTRATE AND 5 OTHERS

Obaid Ahmad, a party to an earlier writ petition that obtained a mandamus directing the State not to demolish his property without acquiring title or paying compensation under the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition Act, 2013, filed a contempt application after the …

ANIL KUMAR AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioners Anil Kumar and another filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition in the Allahabad High Court challenging the registration of the FIR against them. The State, represented by the Additional Government Advocate, submitted an office report dated 4 May 2026 indicating that the …

MOHD. SALEEMversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 4 OTHERS

The petitioner, Mohd. Saleem, filed a writ petition under Article 226 seeking the release of his hypothecated vehicle seized by the respondent bank for default on loan EMIs. The bank argued that seizure was lawful due to the default. The petitioner offered to pay a lump sum of Rs 15,00,000 within 30 …

MURARI RASTOGIversusSTATE OF U P AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioners filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition challenging the registration of an FIR. The State, represented by the Additional Government Advocate, submitted an office report dated 4 May 2026 indicating that a charge-sheet had already been filed in the case. The Court observed that …

TAUFIQ AHMAD @ SAJID AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

Petitioners Taufiq Ahmad and another filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition challenging their potential arrest. The State of Uttar Pradesh and two others responded, and the Attorney General indicated that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken …

PRIYANKAversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioner, Priyanka, filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition challenging the registration of the FIR against her. The State, represented by the Additional Government Advocate, submitted an office report dated 4 May 2026 indicating that the charge‑sheet had already been filed by the …

MOHD. HAIDER AND 3 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

Petitioners filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking protection from arrest pending the court's taking cognizance of a charge sheet that had been filed. The State, through the Additional Government Advocate, confirmed that the charge sheet was submitted but it was unclear whether …

SANJAY RAMversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioner, Sanjay Ram, filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition challenging his potential arrest. The State of U.P. and two others responded, and the Attorney General informed the court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of the …

AKASH PATEL AND 5 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioners filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from arrest. The State's counsel informed the court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of it. The High Court noted that an interim order was already in force …

NITU RAM @ NITUversusSTATE OF U P AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioner, Nitu Ram, filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition challenging her potential arrest. The State, represented by the Attorney General, informed the court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of the police report. The …

ROHTASH AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

Petitioners Rohtash and another filed Criminal Miscellaneous Writ Petition No. 6552 of 2023 before the Allahabad High Court. The petitioner's counsel, Madan Singh, was not present before the bench. No interim relief had been granted in the proceedings. The court observed that the petition had become …

SANTOSH PATEL AND 7 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioners filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition challenging the registration of an FIR. The State, represented by the Additional Government Advocate, submitted an office report dated 4 May 2026 indicating that a charge-sheet had already been filed in the matter. The Court noted that the …

SIRAJUL HAQ AND 3 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

A criminal miscellaneous writ petition (No. 6624 of 2023) was filed by Sirajul Haq and three others against the State of Uttar Pradesh and three others. The petitioner's counsel, Sandeep Pandey, was not present before the bench. No interim relief was sought or granted during the pendency of the …

ANANT KUMAR DUBEYversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

Anant Kumar Dubey filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief against his arrest. The State of U.P. and three others submitted a charge sheet, but the court was uncertain whether cognizance of the police report had been taken. The learned Additional Government Advocate highlighted …

SANSKAR PANDEYversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioner, Sanskar Pandey, filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from arrest. The State of U.P. and three others responded, and the Attorney General indicated that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of it. The High …

AKHILESH KUMAR SINGH @ THALLUversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioner, Akhilesh Kumar Singh, filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from arrest. The State, represented by the Additional Advocate General, informed the court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of the …

SHRIKRISHNA AND 4 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioners filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief against their arrest. The State informed the court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of the police report. The High Court noted the existence of an interim …

AKHILESH KUMARversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioner, Akhilesh Kumar, filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from arrest. The State, represented by the Attorney General, informed the court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of it. The High Court noted …

ATUL SAXENA AND 3 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

Petitioners Atul Saxena and three others filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from potential arrest. The State, represented by the Additional Government Advocate, informed the Court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken …

ARUN KUMAR TIWARI @ ROHAN TIWARI AND 3 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioners filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from arrest. The State’s Advocate informed the court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of the police report. The High Court noted that, while the charge sheet …

VIKAS AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioners, Vikas and another, filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from potential arrest. The State, represented by the Attorney General, informed the court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of the police …

OM PRAKASH PANDEYversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioner, Om Prakash Pandey, filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from arrest. The State of U.P. and others submitted that a charge sheet had already been filed, but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of the police report. The High Court noted …

VISHNU DAYOL AND 2 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioners sought relief from arrest in a criminal case where a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of the police report. The State's Advocate confirmed the filing of the charge sheet but could not ascertain cognizance. The High Court, …

PRABHU NATH PRASAD AND 2 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioners filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from potential arrest. The State, through the Additional Government Advocate, informed the Court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of the police report. The …

BRIJ PALversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

Petitioner Brij Pal filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition before the Allahabad High Court. The petitioner’s counsel, Rajesh Kumar Tiwari, was not present during the hearing. No interim relief had been granted. The Court observed that the petition had become infructuous due to the lapse of …

VED PRAKASH AND 5 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioners, Ved Prakash and five others, filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition before the Allahabad High Court seeking relief. The court noted that mediation between the parties had failed. No counsel appeared on behalf of either the petitioners or the respondents to argue the petition. …

SMT. KESHRI DEVI AND 2 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U P AND 2 OTHERS

Petitioners Smt. Keshri Devi and two others filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from arrest. The State, represented by the Additional Government Advocate, informed the court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of …

DHYANPAL SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioners filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from arrest. The State informed the court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of it. The High Court noted the existence of an interim order in the writ petition …

BITTU AND 2 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U P AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioners Bittu and two others filed Criminal Miscellaneous Writ Petition No. 6882 of 2022 against the State of Uttar Pradesh and two others. The petition was a criminal writ proceeding before the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad. Counsel for the petitioners, Manoj Kumar Mishra, was not …

BAINAMI SINGH AND 4 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

Petitioners filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from arrest. The State informed the court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of the police report. The High Court noted the existence of an interim order in the …

KAUSHAL KUMAR PATEL AND 4 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

Petitioners Kaushal Kumar Patel and four others filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from arrest. The State counsel informed the Court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of it. The High Court, noting the existence …

MONIKA SHARMAversusPRAVEEN KUMAR

Monika Sharma filed a transfer application (Civil) No. 375 of 2023 in the Allahabad High Court seeking to move the proceedings to another court. No counsel appeared on behalf of the applicant to pursue the application. The court noted the lack of prosecution of the transfer petition. Consequently, …

HARISH CHANDRA YADAVversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

Harish Chandra Yadav filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief against arrest. The State of U.P. and three others responded, stating that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of it. The High Court noted the uncertainty …

SANJH GUPTA AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioners Sanjh Gupta and another filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from arrest. The State, represented by the Attorney General, informed the court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of the police report. …

HARISH CHANDRA MAURYA AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioners, Harish Chandra Maurya and another, filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from potential arrest. The State, represented by Shailendra Kumar Upadhyay, informed the court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken …

RAJESH KUMAR PATELversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioner, Rajesh Kumar Patel, filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition challenging the prospect of his arrest. The State had filed a charge sheet, but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of the police report. The learned Additional Government Advocate informed the …

ALOK DIWAKAR AND 16 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioners, Alok Diwakar and 16 others, filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking protection from arrest. The State of U.P. informed the Court that a charge sheet had already been filed but it was uncertain whether the trial court had taken cognizance of the police report. The High …

PRAKASH TIWARIversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

A criminal miscellaneous writ petition (No. 6839 of 2023) was filed by Prakash Tiwari against the State of Uttar Pradesh and three others. The petitioner’s counsel, Alkshendra Nath Bajpai and Subedar Shukla, were not present before the court. No interim order had been passed in the matter. The court …

PADAM SINGH AND 2 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

Petitioners Padam Singh and two others filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from arrest. The State, represented by the Additional Government Advocate, informed the court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of the …

OM PRAKASH YADAV AND 3 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

Petitioners Om Prakash Yadav and three others filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking protection from arrest. The State had filed a charge sheet, but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of the police report. The learned Additional Government Advocate confirmed …

MUZAMMIL HUSAINversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

Muzammil Husain filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition challenging his potential arrest. The State of U.P. and others had filed a charge sheet, but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of the police report. The petitioners sought relief to prevent arrest pending …

DR KAMRANversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court considered a bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, on behalf of Dr. Kamran, who is charged under several provisions of the Indian Medical Council Act for operating an unregistered physiotherapy centre. The FIR alleges the violation …

PRITI PANDEY AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

Petitioners Priti Pandey and another filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition before the Allahabad High Court seeking relief against arrest. The State of U.P. and three others were respondents. The learned Attorney General informed the Court that a charge sheet had been filed by the …

VIRENDRA SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

Virendra Singh filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from arrest. The State informed the court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of it. The High Court noted the existence of an interim order in the petition and, …

BHANU PRATAP SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioner, Bhanu Pratap Singh, filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from arrest. The State, represented by the Additional Government Advocate, informed the court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of the …

RAHUL (HUSBAND) AND 6 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioners, including Rahul (husband), filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from arrest. The State’s Additional Government Advocate informed the court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of the police report. …

SMT. MAYA TIWARI AND 6 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioners, Smt. Maya Tiwari and six others, filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking protection from arrest. The State, represented by the Advocate General, informed the court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of it. …

SMT. SACHI CHAUDHARIversusSARVJEET SINGH

The applicant, Smt. Sachi Chaudhari, filed a transfer application in the Allahabad High Court seeking to move the suit to another court. No counsel appeared on behalf of the applicant to pursue the application. Consequently, the court dismissed the transfer application for want of prosecution. The …

PRAVENDRA @ PRAVENDRA KUMAR AND 4 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 4 OTHERS

The petitioners, including Pravendra Kumar, filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking protection from arrest. The State had filed a charge sheet, but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of the police report. The High Court noted the existence of an interim order in …

SONUversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The High Court considered a bail application filed by Sonu, accused under Sections 65(1) and 62 of the Criminal Procedure Code, and Section 18 of the POCSO Act, for an alleged offence involving a minor victim. The applicant claimed innocence, arguing that the FIR was delayed and that the victim’s …

SHAHBAZ ALAMversusSRI SATYENDRA KUMAR, DISTRICT MAGISTRATE AND 5 OTHERS

Shahbaz Alam filed a contempt application alleging that the Nagar Nigam, Varanasi demolished his house in violation of a July 2025 writ order which required any acquisition for road widening to be effected only through mutual consent or compensation under the Right to Fair Compensation and …

MUSHTAQ ALIversusSRI SATYENDRA KUMAR AND 5 OTHERS

Mushtaq Ali filed a writ petition seeking protection of his house from demolition in connection with a road‑widening project, relying on a prior order that compensation under the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition Act, 2013 must be paid before any acquisition. The High …

ASHOK KUMAR AHIRWARversusSTATE OF U.P.

Ashok Kumar Ahirwar, charged with rape and related offences under Sections 376(1), 328, 323, 342, 506 IPC and Section 67 IT Act, had been in judicial custody for over three and a half years while only three of six prosecution witnesses had been examined. The applicant sought bail, arguing that his …

GYAN PRAKASH YADAVversusState of UP AND 3 OTHERS

Petitioner Gyan Prakash Yadav filed a writ petition before the Allahabad High Court. The petitioner's counsel, Anurag Yadav, was later engaged as subsequent counsel but reportedly had no instructions. No petitioner appeared before the court on the revised list to pursue the petition. Consequently, …

NASEEM KHANversusGOPAL KRISHNA GANGAL

The petition under Article 227 challenged the Small Causes Court and the revisional court's orders that decreed eviction of the petitioner, a tenant, and awarded arrears of rent to the landlord. The petitioner contended that the Uttar Pradesh Act No. 13 of 1972 should apply, arguing that the …

MOHAMMAD ZAKI KHANversusGOPAL KRISHNA GANGAL

The petition under Article 227 challenged the Small Causes Court and the revisional court's orders that decreed eviction of the petitioner-tenant and awarded arrears of rent to the respondent-landlord. The petitioner claimed that the premises fell within the ambit of U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972 because …

ISHAN INSTITUTE OF LAWversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The Ishan Institute of Law filed a writ petition (Writ No. 6933 of 2026) before the Allahabad High Court challenging certain actions of the State of Uttar Pradesh and two other respondents. The petitioner sought relief, but the Respondent No.1 filed a personal affidavit indicating that the appeal …

MAKHAN LAL AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The applicants filed a Section 528 application in the Allahabad High Court seeking to quash a warrant, notice and order dated 02‑12‑2024 issued by the Additional District and Sessions Judge (Special Judge, POCSO Act) in a criminal case involving offences under Sections 376, 366, 363 IPC and Section …

CHANDAN SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court considered a bail application filed by Chandan Singh, who was arrested in Crime No.151 of 2025 under Sections 212, 217, 231, 229, 61(2), 109(1) and 352 of the B.N.S. The applicant claimed he was falsely implicated and that the FIR was lodged by his own son after alleged self‑inflicted …

ALIMUN NISHAversusSRI SATYENDRA KUMAR, DISTRICT MAGISTRATE AND 5 OTHERS

The applicant, Alimun Nisha, filed a contempt application after the High Court, in Writ‑C No. 26542 of 2025, ordered that no demolition of her property could occur unless the procedure under the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, …

NIKHIL SINGH ALIAS NIKHIL PRATAPversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioner, Nikhil Singh, filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition challenging the First Information Report (FIR) filed against him. During the pendency of the petition, the police submitted a final report, indicating the closure of the investigation. The petitioner sought to withdraw the …

ANIL KUMAR YADAV @ SUGANversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The applicant filed an application under Section 528 of the BNSS seeking to quash the charge sheet, cognizance order and summoning order in a criminal case arising from offences under Sections 323, 504, 506, 452 of the IPC and Section 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Act. The …

KAMRAN AHMADversusSRI SATYENDRA KUMAR, DISTRICT MAGISTRATE AND 5 OTHERS

The High Court disposed a civil contempt application filed by Kamran Ahmad against the District Magistrate and others. The application arose from a prior writ petition (Writ‑C No. 26542 of 2025) in which the Court had ordered that no demolition of the petitioners' constructions could occur except in …

SANJU AND 4 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The applicants filed a Section 482 CrPC application seeking to quash criminal proceedings (Case No. 2445 of 2020) arising from offences under IPC sections 147, 148, 323, 324, 452 and 308. The trial court had verified that the parties had reached a written compromise, and the State AGA and the …

SMRITI (MINOR) (CORPUS) AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 4 OTHERS

The High Court entertained a habeas corpus petition filed by minor Smriti, aged about 16, seeking her release from police custody. The police produced Smriti before the Court and explained that she had been enticed to elope by a private respondent, Masoom, who is already in judicial custody for …

SMT.ANJALI @ GODIYAversusCHETAN SINGH @ RAHUL KUMAR

The applicant, Smt. Anjali @ Godiya, filed Transfer Application No. 459 of 2023 before the Allahabad High Court seeking transfer of the suit. No counsel appeared on behalf of the applicant to press the application. The court observed that the application was not prosecuted. Consequently, the …

SAMEERversusSRI SATYENDRA KUMAR, DISTRICT MAGISTRATE AND 2 OTHERS

The applicant, Sameer, a tenant, filed a contempt application alleging that the State and the District Magistrate were proceeding to demolish his shop without complying with a prior Division Bench order. The earlier writ petitions (Writ C No. 12319/2025 and Writ C No. 31841/2025) had directed the …

RAJ BAHADUR @ GULKAI AND 4 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The appellants filed a criminal appeal seeking to quash the cognizance and all proceedings in Sessions Case No. 227 of 2025, which involved offences under the B.N.S. and the SC/ST Act, on the ground that the parties had reached a compromise that was verified by the trial court. A coordinate bench of …

SHALIN MUDGALversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The petitioner, Shalin Mudgal, filed a petition under Article 227 before the Allahabad High Court. The petitioner sought to withdraw the petition while seeking liberty to file a fresh petition before the appropriate court. The respondent, the State of U.P., raised no objection to the withdrawal. The …

ANUBHAV MISHRAversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The applicant, Anubhav Mishra, filed an application under Section 528 of the Criminal Procedure Code seeking to quash the cognizance and summoning order dated 19‑07‑2024 and the charge‑sheet No. 254/2023 in a criminal case involving offences under Sections 323, 504, 506 IPC and the Scheduled Castes …

VISHAL AND 2 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 6 OTHERS

The petitioners sought quash of an FIR dated 10‑08‑2025 filed under IPC sections 191(2), 191(3), 115(2), 109(1), 352, 351(3) BNS and Section 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST Act. The parties had reached a compromise, which was verified by the Chief Judicial Magistrate of Kanpur Dehat. The State expressed no …

SMT. SEEMAversusRAJU SHARMA

Smt. Seema filed a civil transfer application (No. 479 of 2023) against Raju Sharma. No counsel appeared on behalf of the applicant to pursue the application. The High Court noted the lack of prosecution and dismissed the transfer application. Consequently, any interim order previously granted was …

MRS. MUSTAKEEM BEGUMversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND ANOTHER

The petitioner, Mrs. Mustakeem Begum, challenged the confiscation and auction of her vehicle ordered by the District Magistrate under the U.P. Cow Slaughter Prevention Act and related IPC provisions, alleging that the vehicle was falsely implicated in a criminal case. The High Court noted that the …

MUNIRAJ SINGHversusVIJAY KUMAR SINGH AND 4 OTHERS

The petitioner filed a writ under Article 227 seeking to set aside the order dated 13‑12‑2024 of the Additional District and Sessions Judge, which had overturned an earlier order dated 03‑02‑2023 passed by the Sub‑Divisional Officer under Section 145 of the Criminal Procedure Code. The 2023 order …

OM PRAKASH RAI AND 3 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The petitioners filed a petition under Article 227 of the Constitution seeking to set aside an order dated 21 March 2023 passed by the Additional District and Sessions Judge (F.T.C.-01), Azamgarh, which had remanded a criminal case back to the trial court for fresh consideration. The original FIR …

MOHD AFZALversusSTATE OF UP AND 2 OTHERS

Petitioner Mohd Afzal challenged the attachment of his property by orders dated 17.02.2026 and 17.06.2023 issued by the District Magistrate under Section 14 of the U.P. Gangsters and Anti‑Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, contending that the property was purchased from his own income and …

BAIJNATHversusSTATE OF U.P.

The applicant, Baijnath, was arrested in connection with a 1992 case under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code alleging that he and others threw bombs at police, though no police personnel were injured. He has been in custody since 13 November 2025 and claims false implication, asserting no prior …

AMIR AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF UP AND 3 OTHERS

Petitioners Amir and another filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition challenging an FIR dated 30.01.2026 that alleged offences under various IPC sections, the Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, 2021 and several provisions of the BNSS. The State, through the …

RAKESH SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

Petitioner Rakesh Singh filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition challenging the FIR filed against him. The petition was heard in the revised list with no petitioner present, while the State's Additional Government Advocate was present. The court noted that the charge-sheet had already been …

HARBHAJAN SINGHversusSTATE OF UP AND 2 OTHERS

Harbhajan Singh appealed against a criminal conviction, but after settling the dispute with the State, both parties entered into a compromise. The appellant's counsel informed the court that the appellant no longer wished to pursue the appeal and requested its dismissal as not pressed. The court …

PANKAJversusSTATE OF U.P.

The Allahabad High Court considered a second bail application filed by Pankaj, who is charged under Sections 498A, 304B, 323, 506 IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Domestic Violence Act for the alleged dowry‑related death of his wife. The prosecution argued that the FIR was lodged promptly, the death …

AJAY KUMARversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court of Allahabad considered a second bail application filed by Ajay Kumar, who is accused under Sections 8 and 20 of the NDPS Act in Crime No. 415 of 2025. His first bail plea had been rejected, but co‑accused Himanshu Jatav and Neeraj Vats had been granted bail by the same court. The …

SMT. AYUSHI SRIVASTAVAversusVIKAS KUMAR

The applicant, Smt. Ayushi Srivastava, filed a transfer application (Civil) No. 438 of 2022 before the Allahabad High Court seeking transfer of the suit. The counsel for the applicant were Prashant Kumar Singh, Santosh Kumar Nigam and Satyawan Shahi. The opposite party, Vikas Kumar, was represented …

YASHRAAJ @ YASHPAL SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The applicant, Yashraaj @ Yashpal Singh, filed an anticipatory bail application under Section 482 CrPC in a case where he was charged with offences under Sections 376 and 406 IPC. He claimed innocence, alleging a belated FIR, contradictions in statements, and no medical injuries to the victim. The …

PINTOOversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The appellant Pintoo was charged under the Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and several IPC offences for an alleged assault. The appellant contended that the FIR and the statements of the informant and eye‑witness did not contain any specific caste‑related …

MANOHAR SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P.

Manohar Singh was arrested in connection with a case (Crime No. 0195 of 2025) involving multiple offences under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 190, 115(2), 351(2), 351(3) and 103(2) of the B.N.S., 2023. The FIR and witness statement alleged a collective involvement of 13 persons, but did not assign a …

SARMAST KHANversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioner, Sarmast Khan, filed a writ petition seeking two orders of mandamus: (i) to suspend the effect of an order dated 19‑12‑2025 passed by the District Magistrate penalising him for alleged unauthorised sand extraction, and (ii) to direct the Commissioner of Jhansi to expeditiously dispose …

BRAJESH KUMAR AND 5 OTHERSversusTHE STATE OF UP AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioners filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition challenging the registration of an FIR. The State, represented by the learned Additional Government Advocate, submitted an office report indicating that a charge-sheet had already been filed by the Director General of Police, U.P. The …

PAWAN VERMAversusSTATE OF U.P.

Pawan Verma applied for bail in Criminal Case No. 356 of 2025, charged under Sections 126(2), 310(2) and 317(3) of the Indian Penal Code for alleged robbery and murder. He contended that he was falsely implicated, that the FIR named five unknown persons, and that the recovery of stolen items from …

RAJEEV AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioners challenged orders dated 20‑01‑2024 by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Baghpat, and 27‑01‑2025 by the Additional Session Judge, on the ground that the lower courts relied solely on the victim's and informant's statements while ignoring material evidence, notably mobile‑phone location …

AKASHversusSTATE OF U.P.

Akash applied for bail in a case (Crime No. 43 of 2025) where he was charged under Sections 347(1) B.N.S., 8/21, 23, 29 of the NDPS Act and Section 63 of the Copyright Act for alleged involvement in a drug‑smuggling incident. The FIR named three persons, two of whom were arrested on the spot; Akash …

SURESH CHANDRA TIWAR AND 5 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioners, who are existing street vendors, applied for vending shop allotments under Section 3 of the Street Vending Act, 2014 in various work circles and sectors, but the Noida Authority failed to issue licenses or allotment letters despite completing surveys and selection. They filed a writ …

RAJEEV KUMARversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 6 OTHERS

Petitioner Rajeev Kumar alleged that his father's adoption and inheritance rights were being usurped by respondents who forged a death certificate of Sardar Singh to claim the ancestral house. A police report corroborated the forgery, but the complaint filed under Section 156(3) of the Criminal …

RAM AYODHYA GONDversusSTATE OF U.P.

The applicant, Ram Ayodhya Gond, a father‑in‑law of a deceased woman who allegedly committed suicide, was arrested in connection with a case under Sections 85, 80(2) of the BNS Act and Sections 3 and 4 of the D.P. Act. He contended that the allegations against him were false, that the deceased died …

SMT ARCHANA TIWARI AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The petitioners, Smt. Archana Tiwari and another, filed a recall application under Section 528 of the Bihar Negotiable Securities Act seeking to set aside an order dated 13‑04‑2026 that had dismissed their earlier application. The High Court recalled that order and restored the application to its …

SMT. SUSHMA AND 2 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

Smt. Sushma and two others filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition in the Allahabad High Court challenging the registration of an FIR. The petition was filed after the police had already filed a charge-sheet, as indicated by a report from the Legal Cell of the Director General of Police, U.P. …

TRISHA SAXENAversusUNION OF INDIA AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioner, Trisha Saxena, filed a writ petition under Article 226 seeking to quash a notice dated 30.02.2026 issued by an Advocate Commissioner that led to possession of her property by a bank. She argued that only the bank, not the Advocate Commissioner, was authorized to issue such notice. …

KAJAL KANNAUJIYA AND 4 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioners filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition challenging the registration of the FIR against them. The State, represented by the learned Additional Government Advocate, submitted an office report dated 4 May 2026 indicating that a charge-sheet had already been filed by the Director …

LAVKUSH YADAVversusSTATE OF U.P.

Lavkush Yadav applied for bail in a criminal case (Crime No. 356 of 2025) under IPC sections 126(2), 310(2) and 317(3). He claimed innocence, stating that the FIR originally named five unknown persons and that the money recovered from him was his own. The charge sheet was filed on 27‑01‑2026 and …

PRAMOD KUMAR SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

Petitioner Pramod Kumar Singh filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition challenging his potential arrest. The State, represented by the Additional Government Advocate, informed the court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of the …

SOBARAN SINGH AND 5 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioners filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition in the Allahabad High Court challenging the registration of an FIR. The State, represented by the learned Additional Government Advocate, submitted an office report dated 4 May 2026 indicating that a charge-sheet had already been filed by …

GIRJA SHANKAR AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

Petitioners Girja Shankar and another filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition in the Allahabad High Court challenging the registration of an FIR. The State, represented by the learned Additional Government Advocate, submitted an office report indicating that the charge-sheet had already been …

DHEERAJ KUMARversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioner filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition challenging the registration of an FIR. The State, represented by the learned Additional Government Advocate, submitted an office report indicating that a charge-sheet had already been filed. The Court noted that the filing of a …

MITTHU MISHRAversusSTATE OF U.P.

The applicant, Mitthu Mishra, filed an anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the CrPC in a case (Crime No. 63/2025) involving alleged offences under Sections 8 and 22 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. He claimed innocence and asserted that the allegations were …

AHMAD BELALversusSHRI SATYENDRA KUMAR AND 4 OTHERS

The applicant, Ahmad Belal, filed a contempt application against State officials and the Municipal Commissioner of Nagar Nigam Varanasi, alleging non‑compliance with a notice issued under Section 331(1)(2) of the Uttar Pradesh Nagar Nigam Adhiniyam, 1959. The respondent, represented by counsel Bipin …

ALAM AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court considered a bail application filed by Alam and Husain Ahmad, who were arrested in connection with a land‑sale dispute alleged under several sections of the BNS. The applicants contended that the FIR was lodged four years after the alleged incident and that they were falsely …

VIJAY KUMAR SHARMA AND 3 OTHERSversusSTATE OF UP AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioners filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition challenging the registration of an FIR. The State, represented by the learned Additional Government Advocate, submitted an office report dated 4 May 2026 indicating that a charge-sheet had already been filed by the Director General of …

RAJVEER SINGH @ RAJAN SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioners filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition challenging the registration of an FIR. The State, represented by the learned Additional Government Advocate, submitted an office report indicating that a charge-sheet had already been filed by the Director General of Police, Uttar …

SUDHEER GUPTA AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioners, Sudheer Gupta and another, filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from arrest. The State, represented by the A.G., indicated that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of it. The High Court noted the …

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

The petitioners filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition in the Allahabad High Court seeking to challenge the registration of an FIR. The State submitted a charge‑sheet on 4 May 2026, as reflected in the legal cell’s office report. The Court observed that the filing of a charge‑sheet indicates …

SHOEBversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioner, Shoeb, filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition in the Allahabad High Court challenging the registration of the FIR against him. The State, represented by the Attorney General, opposed the petition. The court noted that a charge-sheet had already been filed by the Director …

MADHOO YADAV @ SHRADDHAversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The applicant, Madhoo Yadav, filed an application under Section 528 of the Criminal Procedure Code seeking to quash the charge sheet and cognizance order in a case alleging extortion, criminal conspiracy and intimidation under IPC sections 386, 120B and 506. The applicant alleged false implication …

M/S BHAGESHWARI PAPER LTDversusSTATE OF UP AND ANOTHER

M/s Bhageshwari Paper Ltd filed an application under Section 528 of the BNSS seeking to quash a summons dated 8 October 2025 issued by the Special Chief Judicial Magistrate, Meerut, in a complaint under Sections 9 and 9AA of the Central Excise Act, 1944 and the CGST Act. The applicants argued that …

BABITA RANIversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioner, Babita Rani, filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition challenging the registration of an FIR. The State, represented by the Director General of Police, submitted a charge-sheet on 4 May 2026. The High Court noted that the charge-sheet had already been filed, rendering the …

PARVEZ AKHTAR AND 4 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioners filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition challenging the registration of the FIR against them. The petition was heard in the revised list with no petitioner present, while the State's Additional Government Advocate was present. The court noted that the charge-sheet had already …

ANIL KUMAR NISHADversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioner, Anil Kumar Nishad, filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from arrest. The State, represented by the Attorney General, informed the Court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of the police report. The …

JAINAB NISHAversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

Petitioner Jainab Nisha filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition challenging the FIR dated 6‑3‑2026 and the subsequent charge‑sheet filed under sections 221, 351(2) of the IPC, section 67 of the Income‑Tax Act and sections 7/8 of the POCSO Act. The State argued that the investigation was …

SUSHIL KUMAR VARMA AND 9 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioners filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition challenging the registration of an FIR. The State, represented by the Additional Government Advocate, submitted an office report indicating that a charge-sheet had already been filed by the Director General of Police, U.P. The Court noted …

VIPIN ALAIS SAJU ALIAS VIPIN KUMAR YADAVversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

Vipin Alais Saju filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition challenging his potential arrest in a case where a charge sheet had been filed by the investigating officer. The State, represented by the Additional Government Advocate, indicated that while the charge sheet was submitted, it was unclear …

RAMA YADAVversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court considered a bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 on behalf of Rama Yadav, who was arrested in connection with a case (Crime No. 252 of 2025) involving alleged offences under IPC sections 420, 467, 468 and 471. The applicant argued …

THAN SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioner, Than Singh, filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition challenging his potential arrest. The State had filed a charge sheet, but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of the police report. The High Court noted the existence of an interim order in the writ …

ANKIT KUMARversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioner Ankit Kumar filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition challenging the FIR filed against him. The State, represented by the learned Additional Government Advocate, submitted an office report indicating that the charge-sheet had already been filed. The Court noted that the filing of …

NITIN YADAV AND 4 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioners filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition challenging the registration of the FIR against them. The State, represented by the learned Additional Government Advocate, submitted an office report indicating that a charge-sheet had already been filed by the Director General of Police, …

KRISHNA AND 2 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioners, Krishna and two others, filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from potential arrest. The State, represented by the Additional Government Advocate, informed the court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken …

JAI PRAKASH KESARWANIversusTHE STATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

Petitioner Jai Prakash Kesarwani filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing the Commissioner of Prayagraj Division to decide Stamp Appeal No. 1535 of 2025, filed under Section 56(1) of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899, within a short period. The Court noted that the Standing Counsel for the State …

SHUBHAM BAHADUR @ SHUBHAM BHARTIYA @ TEETUversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioners, Shubham Bahadur and others, filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from arrest. The State, represented by the Additional Government Advocate, informed the court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of …

SHARIF AHMAD AND 5 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioners, Sharif Ahmad and five others, filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from potential arrest. The State, represented by the Additional Government Advocate, informed the Court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was uncertain whether the trial court had taken …

SMT SIMPAL RANA @ ARCHNA TOMAR AND 4 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioners Smt Simpal Rana @ Archna Tomar and four others filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition in the Allahabad High Court challenging the FIR registered against them. The State, represented by the learned Additional Government Advocate, submitted a report dated 4 May 2026 indicating …

VENKATESHversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The petitioner, Venkatesh, a member of Ajnara Integrity Society, was summoned by a magistrate under Section 500 IPC based on a complaint alleging he circulated false messages about a fellow society member. The petitioner challenged the summoning order and a subsequent revision order, arguing that …

ARVIND SINGH CHANDELversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The applicant, Arvind Singh Chandel, filed an application under Section 528 of the Code of Civil Procedure before the Allahabad High Court (BNSS No. 11577 of 2026). During the hearing, counsel for the applicant, Puneet Kumar, informed the court that the applicant no longer wished to pursue the …

MANISH KUMAR YADAV AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF UP AND 3 OTHERS

Manish Kumar Yadav and another filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from arrest. The State informed the court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of the police report. The High Court noted the existence of an …

SHAKUNTALA DEVI AND 3 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioners filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition challenging the FIR registered against them. The Court examined a report dated 4 May 2026 indicating that the charge‑sheet had already been filed by the Director General of Police, Uttar Pradesh. Relying on the fact that the charge‑sheet …

SANJAY SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The petitioner, Sanjay Singh, filed a petition under Article 227 of the Constitution before the Allahabad High Court. The petitioner subsequently moved the Court seeking to withdraw the petition and requested liberty to file a fresh petition before the appropriate forum. The learned Additional …

ANSHU AND 3 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioners filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition challenging the registration of the FIR. The State, represented by the learned Additional Government Advocate, submitted an office report indicating that a charge-sheet had already been filed by the Director General of Police, Uttar …

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

The petitioners filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief, and the Court had earlier issued an interim order directing them to deposit a specified amount to explore settlement through the Mediation and Conciliation Centre. The petitioners failed to comply with this deposit order. …

YADVENDRA SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

Yadvendra Singh filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition in the Allahabad High Court challenging the FIR lodged against him. The State, represented by the Assistant Government Advocate, submitted an office report indicating that a charge‑sheet had already been filed by the Director General of …

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

The petitioners filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition in the Allahabad High Court challenging the registration of the FIR against them. The State, represented by the learned Additional Government Advocate, submitted an office report dated 4 May 2026 indicating that the charge‑sheet in the …

PRADEEP CHAURASIYA AND 6 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioners filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition challenging the registration of an FIR. The State, represented by the learned Additional Government Advocate, submitted an office report indicating that a charge-sheet had already been filed against the accused. The Court noted that once a …

MOHAN YADAV AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The petitioners, Mohan Yadav and another, filed an application under Section 528 of the Criminal Procedure Code seeking the quashing of Criminal Case No. 48807 of 2025 (State vs. Brijesh Pandey @ Lalbabu and Others). They argued that the FIR lacked corroborative evidence, the injury report did not …

SANTOSH YADAV AND ANOTHERversusTHE STATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioners, Santosh Yadav and another, filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition in the Allahabad High Court challenging the FIR lodged against them. The State, represented by the Advocate General, appeared before the court while the petitioners were absent. The court noted that the …

SANTOSH YADAV AND 2 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioners, Santosh Yadav and two others, filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition in the Allahabad High Court challenging the registration of the FIR against them. The State, represented by the Additional Government Advocate, submitted an office report dated 4 May 2026 indicating that the …

SMT. PALLAVI YADAVversusABHILASH YADAV

The applicant, Smt. Pallavi Yadav, filed a transfer application (Civil) No. 571 of 2023 before the Allahabad High Court seeking to transfer the suit. No counsel appeared on behalf of the applicant to press the application. Consequently, the Court dismissed the transfer application for want of …

SMT. ARCHNA AND 4 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

Petitioners Smt. Archna and four others filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from arrest. The State informed the Court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of the police report. The High Court noted the uncertainty …

PRASHANT MISHRA @ MANGALversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court considered a bail application filed by Prashant Mishra @ Mangal, who was arrested under Sections 309(4) and 317(2) of the IPC and Section 3/25 of the Arms Act. The applicant argued that he was not named in the FIR, that there was a delay between the alleged incident and the FIR, and …

NEHA GARGversusRAJNEESH GIRI

Neha Garg, an assistant professor at Banaras Hindu University residing in Varanasi with her two minor children, filed a transfer application under Section 24 of the CPC seeking to move her matrimonial divorce suit (Case No. 97 of 2023) from the Allahabad Family Court to the Varanasi Family Court. …

RAHUL AND 3 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioners filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition challenging the registration of the FIR against them. The State, represented by the learned Additional Government Advocate, submitted an office report indicating that a charge-sheet had already been filed by the Director General of Police, …

HAR PRASAD AND 7 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

An application under Section 528 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was filed by Har Prasad and seven others against the State of U.P. and another party. The counsel for the applicants, Ganesh Shanker Srivastava and Vinod Kumar Maurya, did not appear before the court even after a revised call. …

RAJESH KUMAR AGRAHARIversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

Petitioner Rajesh Kumar Agrahari filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition in the Allahabad High Court challenging the registration of an FIR. The State, represented by the Assistant Government Advocate, submitted an office report indicating that a charge‑sheet had already been filed by the …

GAGAN AND 3 OTHERSversusSTATE OF UP AND 4 OTHERS

The petitioners filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief against their arrest. The State informed the court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of it. The High Court noted the existence of an interim order in the writ …

VIJAY KUMAR RAI AND 2 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioners, Vijay Kumar Rai and two others, filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition before the Allahabad High Court seeking relief. The court noted that mediation between the parties had failed. No counsel appeared on behalf of either the petitioners or the respondents to argue the …

SITANSHU DUTTAversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioner filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition challenging the registration of an FIR. The State, through its Additional Government Advocate, submitted an office report indicating that a charge-sheet had already been filed against the accused. The Court noted that once a charge-sheet is …

DEVI PRASAD AND 9 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioners filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition challenging the registration of the FIR. The State, represented by the learned Additional Government Advocate, submitted an office report indicating that the charge-sheet had already been filed. The Court noted that the filing of the …

KESAR SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 9 OTHERS

Petitioner Kesar Singh filed a habeas corpus petition challenging his arrest on 3-4 September 2024 and a remand order dated 4 September 2024, alleging that the arrest memo lacked any valid ground and was prepared on an outdated proforma, and that the remand order showed a non‑application of mind. …

RESHMA AND 4 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

Petitioners Reshma and four others filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking protection from arrest. The State had filed a charge sheet, but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of the police report. The High Court noted the existence of an interim order in the …

PUSHPARAJ AND 4 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioners filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition in the Allahabad High Court challenging the registration of an FIR. The State, represented by the learned Additional Government Advocate, submitted an office report indicating that a charge-sheet had already been filed by the Director …

BOD SINGH AND 7 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioners filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition challenging the FIR filed against them. The State, represented by the learned Additional Government Advocate, submitted an office report indicating that a charge-sheet had already been filed by the Director General of Police, Uttar …

PRADEEP KUMAR AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 5 OTHERS

Petitioners Pradeep Kumar and another filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition challenging their potential arrest. The State, represented by the Additional Government Advocate, indicated that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of it. The …

PURSOTTAMversusUNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER

The petitioner, whose son died after falling from a moving train, obtained a compensation award of Rs.8,00,000 from a railway tribunal, with only 20% released and the balance directed to a fixed deposit. The petitioner filed a writ petition seeking release of the remaining 80% on grounds of …

BHAIYALAL MISHRA @ CHANDRASEN AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioners Bhaiyalal Mishra and another filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition before the Allahabad High Court seeking protection from arrest. The State, through the Advocate General, informed the Court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was uncertain whether the trial court had …

VIDHU SHEKHAR SHARMAversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioner Vidhu Shekhar Sharma filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition challenging his potential arrest. The State, represented by the Additional Government Advocate, informed the court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of …

ROHITversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioner Rohit filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from arrest. The State, represented by the Additional Government Advocate, informed the court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of it. The High Court, …

DINESH AND 4 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioners, Dinesh and four others, filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief against the State of U.P. and three others. The petition alleged that mediation between the parties had failed. No counsel appeared on behalf of either the petitioners or the respondents to argue the …

CHANDRASHEKHAR BAJPAI AND 3 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioners, Chandrashekhar Bajpai and three others, filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition before the Allahabad High Court. The matter was referred to mediation, which ultimately failed. No counsel appeared on behalf of either the petitioners or the respondents to argue the petition. The …