Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Judgments of 2026

15781 judgments · newest first · showing 13001–13200

RAJATversusSTATE OF U.P.

The applicant, Rajat, filed a bail application in a criminal case (Crime No. 470 of 2025) involving charges under Sections 118(1), 352, 351(2) and 109(1) of the B.N.S. He claimed innocence, alleging false implication and that the sole witness – the victim’s brother – was an interested party. The …

X JUVENILEversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The revision petition was filed by a 17‑year‑old juvenile who had been in a child observation home since November 2025, seeking to quash the denial of bail by the Special Judge and the Juvenile Justice Board. The petitioner alleged false implication, lack of incriminating evidence, and that the bail …

PRABHAT MISHRAversusUNION OF INDIA AND 4 OTHERS

The petitioner filed a writ petition (Writ‑A No. 10723 of 2023) before the Allahabad High Court. No counsel appeared on behalf of the petitioner, while the respondent‑Bank was represented by Advocate Harshul Bhatnagar. The Court dismissed the petition for want of prosecution and imposed a cost of …

AJAY YADAVversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

Ajay Yadav filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition in the Allahabad High Court challenging the FIR dated 21‑06‑2025 registered under Sections 123, 303(2) and 351(3) of the Indian Penal Code. During the hearing, the petitioner withdrew the challenge to the FIR and instead sought a direction that …

RIHANA AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 5 OTHERS

A writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution was filed by Rihana and another seeking a mandamus directing certain respondents not to interfere with their peaceful life and to provide protection. The petitioners sought orders to prevent harassment and ensure their safety. During the hearing, …

SACHIN KUMARversusSTATE OF U.P.

The Allahabad High Court considered a bail application filed by Sachin Kumar, who is charged under Sections 137(2) and 87 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita for allegedly kidnapping a minor. The FIR alleged that the applicant enticed the girl, while the victim’s statements recorded under Sections 180 …

RAMANversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court considered a bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 on behalf of Raman, who is accused in Crime No.331 of 2025 of offences including sections 191(2), 191(3), 190, 115(2), 109(1), 352 of the same Act, Section 7 of the Criminal Law …

MANISH TIWARI @ MONUversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The High Court considered a bail application filed by Manish Tiwari under Section 75(1)(i) of the Bail and Surrender Act and Sections 9m/10 of the POCSO Act. The applicant claimed false implication, noting that the informant refused a medical examination of the child and that there was no …

CHHOTE LALversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The applicant, Chhote Lal, filed an application under Section 528 of the Criminal Procedure Code seeking to quash the charge‑sheet dated 21‑06‑2025, the cognizance and summoning order dated 25‑07‑2025, and the entire proceedings in Criminal Case No.15299 of 2025. The charge‑sheet alleged offences …

SHIV KUMARversusSRI SHYAM NARAYAN SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE AND ANOTHER

Shiv Kumar filed a contempt application against Sri Shyam Narayan, Senior Superintendent of Police, and another police official. The applicant alleged contempt of court, but the State side submitted that a First Information Report (FIR) had been lodged on 31 March 2026 (FIR No. 0043 of 2026). The …

SITARAM RASTOGIversusState of UP AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioner, Sitaram Rastogi, filed Writ‑C No. 11375 of 2024 challenging the actions of the State of Uttar Pradesh and two other respondents. The matter was heard before Hon’ble Justice Manjive Shukla of the Allahabad High Court. The court referred to an earlier order dated 20 April 2026 in …

ROSHANI DIWAKAR AND ANOTHERversusTHE STATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioners, Roshani Diwakar and another, filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing the State of U.P. and others not to harass or interfere with their peaceful marital life. The petition was presented before Hon'ble Justice Sanjay Kumar Pachori. After hearing, the petitioners, through …

BHUPENDRA PATELversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court considered a bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, for Bhupendra Patel who was charged under Sections 8, 20 and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act for alleged possession of 28.135 kg of ganja recovered …

SHANKAR LALversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 6 OTHERS

Shankar Lal filed an application under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita challenging a order dated 24‑03‑2025 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Jaunpur, and a criminal revision order dated 27‑01‑2026 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Jaunpur. The applicant …

NITIN BABUversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court considered a bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, on behalf of Nitin Babu, who was arrested in a case involving alleged offences under Sections 318(4), 336(3), 338, 340(2), 3(5) of the same Act and Section 13 of the Public Gambling …

HIMANSHUversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court considered a bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, on behalf of Himanshu, who was arrested in a case involving alleged offences under Sections 318(4), 336(3), 338, 340(2), 3(5) of the same Act and Section 13 of the Public Gambling …

VIKAS YADAVversusSTATE OF U.P.

The applicant, a 19‑year‑old student, was charged under Section 103(1) CrPC for firing a double‑barrel gun that killed a deceased during a scuffle, as alleged by the prosecution and corroborated by several eyewitnesses. The applicant claimed he was falsely implicated, arguing the shooting was …

RAKESH AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The applicants filed an application under Section 528 of the BNSS seeking to quash the charge sheet and the magistrate's cognizance order in a criminal case alleging offences under Sections 115(2), 352 and 127(2) of the IPC. They argued that they were falsely implicated, the injury report was …

KALLU AND 4 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The applicants Kallu and four others filed a Section 528 application seeking to quash the criminal proceedings (Case No. 6059 of 2024) arising from Crime No. 0088/2024 under IPC sections 147, 452, 323, 504 and 506. They contended that the cognizance order dated 1 July 2024 was issued before the …

SMT. MITHLESH AND 5 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The Allahabad High Court considered three applications under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. seeking to quash Criminal Complaint Case No. 586 of 2019, which alleged offences under Sections 420, 467, 468 and 471 IPC. The complaint arose from a civil dispute over land and sale deeds, where the complainant …

VIKRAM GIRIversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The applicant Vikram Giri filed a Section 528 CrPC application seeking to quash the summoning order issued by a Special Judicial Magistrate in a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act alleging that he issued a cheque of Rs.5,00,000 for the purchase of "Pashu Aahar" which later …

AMOLA DEVI AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P.

The Allahabad High Court considered a bail application filed by Amola Devi and Malti Devi, who were charged under multiple sections of the Indian Penal Code and other statutes for a violent incident in Kushinagar. The applicants argued that the FIR and witness statements ascribed a general role to …

LAL BAHADURversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioner filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing the Sub‑Divisional Magistrate (respondent no.2) to consider and decide a statutory appeal filed on 31‑01‑2026 under Rule 6‑Ka of the U.P. Panchayat Raj (Kutumb Register Anurakshan) Niyamawali, 1970. The appeal arose because a private …

JAGESHVARversusUP STATE BRIDGE CORPORATION LTD AND 4 OTHERS

The petitioner, Jageshvar, filed a writ petition challenging the alleged lesser payment of his retiral dues by Up State Bridge Corporation Ltd and others. The petitioner sought relief from the High Court of Allahabad. The court, after hearing counsel for both sides, did not grant immediate relief …

SMT. RANIversusU.P. STATE BRIDGE CORPORATION LTD. AND 4 OTHERS

Smt. Rani filed a writ petition before the Allahabad High Court challenging the payment of her retiral dues by U.P. State Bridge Corporation Ltd. and other respondents, alleging that the amount paid was less than what she was entitled to. The petitioner sought relief through the writ petition. The …

ABHISHEK AND 3 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The applicants filed an application under Section 528 of the BNSS seeking to quash a seizure and forfeiture order dated 05‑02‑2026, which had been passed by the Additional District and Sessions Judge (Special Judge POCSO Act) in Criminal Case No. 171 of 2026. The order was based on multiple …

ASGAR ALIversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court considered a bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, on behalf of Asgar Ali, who was arrested in connection with a case involving alleged assault and violations of the Arms Act. The applicant claimed innocence, stating that he had no …

ASHOK KUMAR SONI @ ASHOK KUMARversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioner, a licensed holder of a revolver, had his arms licence cancelled by the District Magistrate under Sections 3 and 4 of the U.P. Gunda Act. He filed a statutory appeal before the Commissioner, Jhansi Region, on 20 August 2024, but the appeal remained pending for an extended period. The …

SATYA PRAKASHversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioner, Satya Prakash, filed a writ petition challenging an order dated 16 April 2026 issued by the Additional Director General of Police, which rejected his claim. The High Court, after noting the affidavit and the petitioner's representation filed on 10 April 2026, considered the petition. …

YASEEN PATHAN @ YASEEN GHODAversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court considered a bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, on behalf of Yaseen Pathan, who was arrested in connection with a case involving alleged assault with a firearm and multiple offences under the B.N.S.S. and the Arms Act. The …

ANIL SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court considered a bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, on behalf of Anil Singh, who was arrested in a narcotics case under Sections 8 and 21 of the NDPS Act for allegedly possessing 400 g of heroin. The applicant claimed innocence, …

KESHAV PRASHADversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 4 OTHERS

The petitioner, Keshav Prashad, filed a writ petition seeking a direction to the Board of Revenue, Prayagraj, to expedite the hearing of Revision No. 2217 of 2025. The revision had been heard twice, on 6 June 2025 and 18 August 2025, but no final order was passed, and a further hearing was fixed for …

PREM RAJ AND 26 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 5 OTHERS

The petitioners, a group of contract workers, filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing the State of Uttar Pradesh to regularise their employment. The Court observed that the petition did not cite any legal provision that would entitle the petitioners to regularisation. Consequently, the …

ANUP AND 2 OTHERSversusSTATE OF UP AND ANOTHER

Sudha and Sapna filed an application under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) challenging a provisional order dated 23‑01‑2026 passed by the Civil Judge/Judicial Magistrate of Bhognipur, Kanpur Dehat in FIR No. 1736 of 2023 under IPC Sections 354 and 506. The High Court …

KAVI CHANDRAversusSTATE OF U.P.

The Allahabad High Court considered a bail application filed by Kavi Chandra, who was charged under IPC sections 103(1), 190, 191(2) and 191(3) for a murder alleged to have occurred on 16 August 2025. The applicant argued that he was not named in the FIR, was absent from CCTV footage, and that …

KISHAN PAL @ PUNCHversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court of Allahabad considered a bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, on behalf of Kishan Pal @ Punch, who was arrested in a case under the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Antisocial Activities (Prevention) Act. The applicant claimed false …

RAJVATI DEVI AND 4 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P..AND ANOTHER

An application under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code was filed by Rajvati Devi and four others seeking relief against the State of U.P. and another party. The High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, presided by Justice Gautam Chowdhary, allowed the application. The order refers to a …

MUNISHWAR SINGH AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The applicants, Munishwar Singh and another, filed an application under Section 528 of the BNSS seeking to quash a non‑bailable warrant dated 30‑09‑2025 issued by the Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division)‑II, Bareilly in a criminal complaint under IPC sections 420 and 506. They alleged that the …

SARVESH DEVIversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The applicant, Sarvesh Devi, filed a bail cancellation application but later expressed a desire to withdraw it. The State's counsel had no objection to the withdrawal. The court considered the request and dismissed the bail cancellation application as withdrawn. No substantive issues on bail were …

SHIVAMversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court of Allahabad considered a bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, on behalf of Shivam, who was arrested in a case registered under Sections 2 and 3 of the Uttar Pradesh Gangster and Anti‑Social Activities (Prevention) Act. The …

RAJKUMAR SAVITA AND 3 OTHERSversusSTATE OF UP AND ANOTHER

The applicants filed an application under Section 528 of the Criminal Procedure Code seeking to quash the cognizance and summoning order dated 28‑11‑2025 in Crime No. 454 of 2024, alleging that the FIR and charge‑sheet did not warrant interference. The High Court examined the FIR, the impugned order …

ZUBAIRversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court considered a bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, for the accused Zubair who is charged under Sections 2 and 3 of the Uttar Pradesh Gangster and Anti‑Social Activities (Prevention) Act. The applicant claimed innocence, highlighted …

SHUBHAMversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court of Allahabad considered a bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, on behalf of Shubham, who was arrested in a case registered under Sections 2 and 3 of the U.P. Gangster and Anti‑Social Activities (Prevention) Act. The applicant …

GOVIND KUSHWAHAversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The High Court considered a bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, on behalf of Govind Kushwaha, who was arrested on 19‑12‑2025 in connection with offences under Sections 3 to 7 of the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act and Section 99 of the BNS. The …

MOHAN SINGHversusDR. BHIM RAO AMBEDKAR UNIVERSITY THRU ITS V.C. AND OTHERS

Dismiss

The appellant, Mohan Singh, failed to appear before the High Court even after a revised call. Consequently, the court dismissed the special appeal on the ground of want of prosecution. The judges, Atul Sreedharan and Vivek Saran, granted the appellant a one‑month period to file a restoration …

SANJAY KUMAR TRIPATHIversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 13 OTHERS

The petitioner filed a writ petition seeking transfer of Appeal No. 6 of 2026, originally before the Commissioner, Varanasi Division, because the officer who had passed the impugned order as District Magistrate had been posted as the Commissioner and was thus hearing the appeal. The petitioner …

SANTOSH KUMAR MISHRAversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 12 OTHERS

The petitioner filed a writ petition seeking transfer of Appeal No. 5 of 2026, which was pending before the Commissioner, Varanasi Division, because the same officer who had passed the original order as District Magistrate had been posted as the Commissioner and was now hearing the appeal. The …

NITAI SARKARversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court considered a bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, on behalf of Nitai Sarkar, who was arrested in a NDNDPS case involving alleged possession of 64 kg of ganja. The applicant claimed false implication and alleged non‑compliance with …

NASRIN AKHTAR AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The complainant, the mother‑in‑law of the applicants, alleged that they conspired with bank officials to open a joint account and misappropriate Rs 10 lakh, leading to a complaint under Section 156(3) CrPC. The police report characterized the matter as a family dispute and found the allegations …

ALLADIN AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The applicants filed an application under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita seeking to stay the criminal proceedings arising from a dispute over a transaction, as recorded in Criminal Appeal No. 929 of 2017. The learned counsel for the applicants argued that the matter is a civil …

DHANPRASADversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 4 OTHERS

Petitioner Dhanprasad filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition before the Allahabad High Court. The petition listed advocates Krishna Kumar Patel and Sangam Lal Kesharwani as counsel, but they did not appear to press the petition. The learned Additional Government Advocate for the State …

SHAMIM ANSARIversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court considered a bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 on behalf of Shamim Ansari, who was arrested in connection with a cyber‑fraud case (Crime No. 46 of 2025) involving multiple BNS offences and Section 66D of the IT Act. The applicant …

AKHAND PRATAP SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court of Allahabad considered a bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, on behalf of Akhand Pratap Singh, who was arrested in a case registered under Sections 2 and 3 of the U.P. Gangster and Anti‑Social Activities (Prevention) Act. The …

UMESH YADAVversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The applicant filed an application under Section 528 of the Indian Penal Code challenging an interlocutory order dated 18‑02‑2026 passed by the Additional Principal Judge of the Family Court, Deoria, under Section 145 of the B.N.S.S. code. The applicant’s counsel argued that the order was not based …

NIDHI TIWARI AND 8 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 8 OTHERS

Petitioners filed a habeas corpus writ petition before the Allahabad High Court seeking relief. During the hearing, counsel for the petitioners expressed that they no longer wish to pursue the petition and requested its withdrawal. The court considered the request and, finding no opposition from the …

SMT. ANAMIKA MAURYA AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioners, Smt. Anamika Maurya and another, filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution seeking an ad interim mandamus to restrain the respondents from interfering in their marital life. They also requested a direction to respondent No.4 not to harass them. During the hearing, …

JAKIR HUSSAINversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court of Allahabad considered a bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, on behalf of Jakir Hussain, who was arrested in a case under Section 3(1) of the U.P. Gangsters and Antisocial Activities (Prevention) Act. The applicant claimed false …

YOGESH KUMARversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court considered a bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, on behalf of Yogesh Kumar, who was arrested for alleged possession of 28.100 kg of ganja under Sections 8 and 20 of the NDPS Act. The applicant argued that mandatory provisions of …

NAZAMAversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court considered a bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, on behalf of Nazama, who is charged under Sections 8 and 21(c) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act for alleged possession of 5.075 kg of charas. The …

RAHUL PANDEY ALIAS MAYANK PANDEYversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court of Allahabad considered a bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, on behalf of Rahul Pandey alias Mayank Pandey, who was arrested in Crime No. 805 of 2025 under Sections 2(b)(i), 2(b)(xi) and 3(1) of the U.P. Gangster and Anti‑Social …

DHARMAVEERversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court of Allahabad considered a bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, on behalf of Dharmaveer, who was arrested in connection with a case involving alleged theft of 3.893 kg of white metal and offences under Sections 112(2), 317(2), 317(5) …

SANJEEVversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court considered a bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, for the accused Sanjeev, who was charged with multiple offences including Sections 191(2), 190, 121, 132, 221, 109 of the B.N.S. and Section 7 of the Criminal Law Amendment Act. The …

SATYAPAL SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court of Allahabad considered a bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 on behalf of Satyapal Singh, who was arrested in a cyber‑fraud case (Crime No. 25 of 2025) involving alleged misappropriation of Rs 2,20,000 and cash of Rs 1,40,000. The …

SANDEEPversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court considered a bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, on behalf of Sandeep, who is accused under Sections 2 and 3 of the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Antisocial Activities (Prevention) Act. The applicant claimed false implication, had …

SUNEEL KUMAR @ SUNIL KUMARversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court considered a bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, for Suneel Kumar, who was charged with IPC offences (420, 468, 471, 120‑B) and IT Act offences (66‑C, 66‑D) relating to alleged cyber fraud and forged GST refunds. The applicant …

ANUSUIYA DEVIversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court considered a bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, on behalf of Anusuiya Devi, who was arrested in a case registered under several provisions of the Uttar Pradesh Gangster and Anti‑Social Activities (Prevention) Act. The applicant …

TEJ NARAYAN SINGH AND 2 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The applicants filed an application under Section 528 of the BNSS (2023) seeking to quash a seizure and forfeiture order dated 16 March 2026, which had been issued by the Chief Judicial Magistrate under Section 107(4) of the B.N.S. in a cyber‑crime case. After hearing, the applicants indicated that …

PRADEEP KUMAR DUBEY AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P.AND ANOTHER

The petitioners filed an application under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code seeking to quash Criminal Case No. 10315 of 2009, which involved offences under Sections 452, 323, 504, 506 of the IPC and Section 3(1)(x) of the SC/ST Act. During the pendency of the trial, a compromise deed was …

NAMAN KUMAR RAIversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 5 OTHERS

Petitioner Naman Kumar Rai filed a public interest litigation seeking enforcement of eviction orders dated 13‑10‑2023 and 28‑10‑2023 passed under Section 67(1) of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 against respondents 5 and 6. The petitioner alleged that despite a Tehsildar’s noting directing a Revenue …

MOHD. NAZIRversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The High Court considered a bail application filed by Mohd. Nazir, who was in custody since 9‑December‑2024 for offences under Sections 65(1), 351(2), 74 BNS of the IPC and Sections 5, 6, 9 and 10 of the POCSO Act. The applicant claimed innocence, asserting that the informant and victim, who were …

ABHISHEK SHARMAversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court considered a bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, on behalf of Abhishek Sharma, who was arrested in Crime No. 4 of 2024 under Sections 2 and 3 of the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Antisocial Activities (Prevention) Act. The applicant …

ABDUL RAHIMversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court considered a bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, on behalf of Abdul Rahim, who is accused under Section 3(1) of the U.P. Gangsters and Antisocial Activities (Prevention) Act. The applicant claimed innocence, had been in custody …

SMT SAVITA AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The petitioners, Smt Savita and another, filed an application under Section 528 of the Criminal Procedure Code before the Allahabad High Court. Their counsel, Brijesh Kumar Srivastava, informed the court that the petitioners wished to withdraw the application and would not pursue any relief. The …

JALBHARATversusRAMANUJ SHUKLA,S.D.O.

The High Court had earlier directed the opposite party, a Sub-Divisional Officer, to complete proceedings under Section 24 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006. The opposite party filed a compliance affidavit on 19 February 2024 stating that the proceedings were concluded on 21 June 2024, attaching the …

VIKASversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court of Allahabad considered a bail application filed by Vikas under Section 3(1) of the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti‑Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 in connection with Crime No. 547 of 2025. The applicant argued that the FIR was vague, lacking specific allegations that fell …

AJAJversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court considered a bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, on behalf of Ajaj, who was arrested in a case under Section 3(1) of the U.P. Gangsters and Antisocial Activities (Prevention) Act. The applicant claimed he was falsely implicated, …

AKHILversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court considered a bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, on behalf of Akhil, who was arrested in a case under Sections 2 and 3 of the U.P. Gangsters and Antisocial Activities (Prevention) Act. Akhil claimed he was falsely implicated and …

RAM PRATAP SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

Ram Pratap Singh, the complainant, alleged that on 13 March 2025 he was forcibly stopped, robbed of Rs. 700, his mobile phone broken and assaulted with sticks, sustaining grievous injuries including a fracture of the scapula. He reported the incident to the police, who medically examined him, and …

ABHISHEK RAIversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The High Court considered a bail application filed by Abhishek Rai, who was charged under several IPC provisions and sections 3 and 4 of the POCSO Act for alleged indecent photography of a minor. The applicant contended that he was falsely implicated, that no indecent photograph was recovered, and …

MOHAMMAD DANISHversusSTATE OF U.P.

Mohammad Danish applied for bail in a case (Crime No. 52 of 2026) alleging violations of Sections 4 and 25 of the Arms Act and Sections 3, 5 and 8 of the Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act, 1955. The applicant contended that the recovery of cow remains, meat and alleged slaughtering instruments was …

GANGADHAR TIWARIversusSTATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS

The petitioner, Gangadhar Tiwari, suffered 40% permanent disability after contacting a live 11,000 kV wire that had been reported broken but not repaired by the electricity department. He filed a claim under Section 6(1) of the Public Liability Insurance Act, 1991 and was awarded Rs 4 lakhs by the …

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

The petitioners, Chhiddu Singh and others, filed a review application challenging a 2001 order of the Allahabad High Court. They sought condonation of delay for filing the review, but the affidavit provided did not sufficiently explain the lapse. The court found the cause shown inadequate and …

BHURAversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court considered a bail application filed by Bhura under Sections 2 and 3 of the U.P. Gangsters and Anti‑Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, relating to a pending criminal case (Crime No.31 of 2026). The applicant argued that the FIR was vague, lacking specific allegations that fit …

VIJAY PATEL AND 2 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The applicants filed an application under Section 528 of the BNSS seeking to quash a summoning order dated 01.04.2006 and the related criminal proceeding (Complaint Case No. 263 of 2006). The court examined the complaint and found that the allegations disclosed a cognizable offence and were …

RAMCHARAN VERMAversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court considered a bail application filed by Ramcharan Verma under Section 483 of the CrPC in a case registered under Sections 8, 20 and 29 of the NDPS Act. The applicant contended that the recovery of 28.135 kg of ganja from a swift car, in which he was merely a passenger, was false and …

RAM BARAN KEWATversusDR. YOGITA SINGH SUB DIVISIONAL MAGISTRATE AND ANOTHER

The applicant, Ram Baran Kewat, filed a contempt application under Section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act alleging that the opposite party, Dr. Yogita Singh, Sub‑Divisional Magistrate, willfully disobeyed a judgment dated 27‑09‑2023 in Writ Petition No.32237 of 2023. The order was served to the …

IRSHAD ALAMversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court considered a bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 on behalf of Irshad Alam, who was arrested in connection with a case (Crime No. 26 of 2025) alleging that he opened fire, causing simple injuries to three persons under Section 109 …

DEV MANI PANDEYversusSTATE OF U.P.

The applicant, Dev Mani Pandey, filed an application under Section 482 of the CrPC seeking to quash the charge‑sheet dated 19‑03‑2018 and related proceedings for offences under Sections 376 and 506 IPC. The applicant and the opposite party, who are living as husband and wife, executed a compromise …

DURGA PRASADversusSTATE OF U.P.

Durga Prasad filed a criminal miscellaneous bail application (No. 12197 of 2026) before the Allahabad High Court. The applicant's counsel, Pradeep Kumar, informed the court that the applicant no longer wished to pursue the bail relief at this stage. The counsel requested that the application be …

SHRI ANUJ SHARMAversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The applicant, Anuj Sharma, filed an application under Section 528 of the BNSS seeking relief from an interim maintenance order of Rs.5,000 per month imposed by the Meerut Family Court under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code. He contended that the order was passed without considering his …

ANUJ KUMAR AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND 4 OTHERS

Petitioner Anuj Kumar filed a habeas corpus petition alleging that his wife, Shivani, was being held illegally by respondents 4 and 5. The court ordered the police to produce Shivani, who testified that she is a major, lives voluntarily with her husband Rajeev, and does not wish to reside with …

GAUTAM VISHWAKARMAversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The applicant, Gautam Vishwakarma, filed an application under Section 529 of the BNSS seeking a direction for an early decision in Criminal Case No. 74 of 2025, which arose from a 2019 domestic violence matter under Section 12 of the Domestic Violence Act. The case was pending before the Civil Judge …

RAJESH KUMAR PANDEYversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 6 OTHERS

The petitioner, Rajesh Kumar Pandey, filed a writ petition challenging a letter dated 27.08.2025 in which the District Panchayat Raj Officer sought permission from the State Government to initiate disciplinary proceedings against him under Article 321-A of the Civil Service Regulation. The High …

PIYUSH MISHRAversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The applicant, Piyush Mishra, filed an application under Section 528 of the BNSS seeking to set aside a provisional order dated 30.05.2025 passed by the Family Court, Prayagraj, in a matrimonial dispute involving alleged dowry harassment. The respondent (State of U.P. and another) had filed a FIR …

SMT RANU @ KUSMAversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court considered a bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, on behalf of Smt Ranu @ Kusma, who had been in custody since 25‑12‑2025 in a case involving multiple serious offences. The applicant claimed innocence, pointed to her name appearing …

SUBHASH CHANDRAversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The applicant filed a criminal revision under Section 482 of the CrPC seeking to quash a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act pending before a Special Magistrate. Mediation between the parties failed, and the court examined the factual disputes and the credibility of the …

ANURAG GUPTAversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court considered a bail application filed by Anurag Gupta, who was in custody since 2 February 2026 in a case under the U.P. Gangsters and Anti‑Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986. The applicant argued that the FIR was vague, did not satisfy the statutory definition of a "gang" or …

PRADYUMAN SINGH AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court considered a bail application filed by Pradyuman Singh and Ankit Singh under the U.P. Gangsters and Anti‑Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986. The applicants argued that the FIR was vague, did not specifically allege an act covered by the definition of "gang" or "gangster", and …

JAGMOHAN DUTT SHARMAversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 7 OTHERS

The petitioner, Jagmohan Dutt Sharma, filed Writ No. 38233 of 2015 before the Allahabad High Court. No counsel appeared on his behalf at the revised call. The Court observed that the petition was not prosecuted and consequently dismissed it. The judges granted the petitioner liberty to file a …

M/S MAA KHANDWARI PG COLLEGEversusUNION OF INDIA AND 6 OTHERS

The petitioner, M/s Maa Khandwari PG College, challenged an order dated 02.01.2026 that froze its bank account, alleging lack of notice, violation of natural justice, and that it had already complied by depositing Rs.11,00,000 as ordered in a 2023 judgment. The petitioner argued that coercive …

UTTAMDASversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court of Allahabad considered a bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 on behalf of Uttamdas, who is charged under Sections 9, 39, 48, 49(Kha), 50, 51 and 57 of the Wildlife Protection Act for possession of protected tortoises. The applicant …

JAYRAMversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The applicant filed an application under Section 528 of the Indian Penal Code seeking to stay the execution of a non‑bailable warrant (NBW) issued in case No. 3865/2023, which involved offences under Sections 307, 323, 504 and 506. The applicant argued that the NBW should be set aside and requested …

AYUSH PRATAP SINGH YADAVversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The applicant, Ayush Pratap Singh Yadav, filed an application under Section 528 of the Indian Penal Code seeking a stay of criminal proceedings (CrPC sections 323, 504, 506, 406) initiated by the Civil Judge (Junior) of Sant Kabir Nagar. The court heard arguments from the applicant’s counsel and the …

ABHIKSHEK VIKRAMversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The applicant, Abhikshek Vikram, filed an application under Section 528 of the Criminal Procedure Code before the Allahabad High Court, seeking discharge. The respondents were the State of Uttar Pradesh and another party. Counsel for the applicant was Vijai Krishna Agnihotri and for the respondents …

HARVINDRAversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court considered a bail application filed by Harvindra, who was in custody since 24 January 2026 for an offence under Sections 2 and 3 of the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti‑Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986. The applicant’s counsel argued that the FIR was vague, did not satisfy the …

RAHIMversusSTATE OF U.P.

The Allahabad High Court considered bail application No. 12189 of 2026 filed by Rahim, who is charged under Sections 2 and 3 of the U.P. Gangsters and Anti‑Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 for alleged disturbance of public order and related offences. The applicant contended that the FIR was …

VIJAL DALEL AND ANOTHERversusSHRI MEGHA ROOPAM COLLECTOR/ DISTRICT MAGISTRATE

The applicants filed a contempt application under Section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, alleging that the opposite party willfully disobeyed the Court’s judgment and order dated 27‑11‑2025 in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No.41879 of 2025. The order was served on the opposite party on 04‑12‑2025, …

CHIRAG UDDINversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court considered a bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 on behalf of accused Chirag Uddin, who is charged under Sections 331(4) and 305 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 for a crime registered at Mirganj Police Station, Bareilly. The …

NITIN YADAVversusSTATE OF U.P.

Nitin Yadav filed a criminal miscellaneous bail application (No. 12974 of 2026) before the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad. The applicant was represented by counsel Ashish Goyal, while the State of U.P. was represented by G.A. During the hearing, counsel for the applicant informed the court of …

KAMAL SINGH SON OF TULARAMversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court considered a bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, for Kamal Singh, who was arrested in a case under Sections 2/3 of the U.P. Gangsters and Antisocial Activities (Prevention) Act. The applicant contended that he was falsely …

RAM JI GONDversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The High Court considered a bail application filed by Ram Ji Gond, who was arrested in connection with a case under Section 108 of the B.N.S. alleging abetment of suicide. The post‑mortem report indicated death by asphyxia due to antemortem hanging, and the prosecution’s evidence, including witness …

SMT. RAGINIversusRAJVEER SINGH

The petitioner, Smt. Ragini, filed a petition under Article 227 seeking expeditious disposal of her matrimonial petition (No. 628 of 2023) pending before the Family Court. The High Court had earlier, on 08‑05‑2024, directed speedy disposal but clarified that this did not bar adjudication of any …

MOHD ALAM AND 3 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The accused filed a revision petition in the Allahabad High Court challenging the order of the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate that dismissed their application for discharge under IPC sections 115(2), 351(2), 352 and 324(2). The High Court examined whether it could entertain the revision …

BRAHMDEV UPADHAYAYversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 6 OTHERS

Brahmdev Upadhayay filed a public interest litigation seeking mandamus against certain officials to remove illegal encroachments on garhi (water‑logged) land in Siddharth Nagar. The petition alleged that two individuals had occupied the land and asked the court to order its restoration. The …

PRINCE YADAVversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The High Court considered a second bail application filed by Prince Yadav, who is accused in a special trial involving offences under the BNS, SC/ST Act, IT Act and POCSO Act. The applicant claimed innocence, citing a victim's statement that did not support the prosecution, and argued that he had …

YASH SAINIversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court of Allahabad considered a bail application filed by Yash Saini, who was arrested under Sections 2 and 3 of the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti‑Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986. The applicant argued that the FIR was vague, did not disclose any act falling within the statutory …

LAL BIHARIversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 5 OTHERS

Lal Bihari filed a public interest litigation seeking a writ directing the State of U.P. and other respondents to implement an order dated 30‑12‑2023 issued by the Assistant Collector/Tehsildar under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 for eviction of encroachers and recovery of damages. The …

FARUKH MUHAMMAD SHIKALGARversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court of Allahabad considered a bail application filed by Farukh Muhammad Shikalgar under Sections 2(b)(i) and 3(1) of the U.P. Gangsters and Anti‑Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986. The applicant argued that the FIR was vague, did not disclose any act falling within the definition of …

SMT NEETUversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

Smt Neetu filed a writ petition seeking to quash the order dated 28‑03‑2026 of the District Basic Education Officer, Baghpat, which rejected her maternity‑leave application without giving any reasons. The High Court had earlier, in Writ‑A No. 1944 of 2026, directed the officer to consider the …

NABBOO ALI ANSARI AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The applicants, practising advocates, were accused in a criminal complaint (sections 420, 467 and 468 IPC) filed by Manjeet Singh arising out of a partition suit they were handling. A non‑bailable warrant was issued against them, and they sought to quash the warrant and the underlying proceedings by …

SHAMIM KHANversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

Shamim Khan was arrested in connection with offences alleged under various sections of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act and other statutes. The applicant contended that he was falsely implicated, pointing to a one‑day delay in filing the …

RAJAversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 23 OTHERS

The petitioner Raja filed a writ petition challenging an interim order dated 6 February 2026 issued by the Board of Revenue, Uttar Pradesh, which entertained a revision filed by respondent No.6 in a land demarcation matter under Section 24 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006. The revision arose after the …

HARSH PALversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court considered a bail application filed by Harish Pal in a narcotics case (Crime No. 45 of 2026) under the NDPS Act. The applicant alleged false implication, claiming that the seizure of 23.9 kg of ganja was irregular, with violations of mandatory provisions of Sections 42, 50 and 52‑A …

SHANI PRAJAPATIversusSTATE OF U.P.

The applicant, Shani Prajapati, sought bail in a criminal case (Crime No. 163 of 2024) under Sections 85 and 80 of the BNS Act and Sections 3/4 of the D.P. Act, alleging that he was falsely implicated in the death of his wife, who allegedly committed suicide by hanging. The applicant’s counsel …

ANKUR NAGARversusSTATE OF U.P.

The Allahabad High Court considered bail application No. 12194 of 2026 filed by Ankur Nagar, who is charged under Sections 2 and 3 of the U.P. Gangsters and Anti‑Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 for alleged disturbance of public order. The applicant contended that the FIR is vague, lacking …

SONU @ KALIM @ ENAversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court considered a bail application filed by Sonu @ Kalim @ Ena, who is charged under Section 109(1) of the B.N.S., Sections 3, 5 and 8 of the Cow Slaughter Act, and Sections 3, 25 and 28 of the Arms Act for allegedly firing at police and possessing a pistol, cartridges and cow meat. The …

RANJAN YADAV @ NAINA YADAVversusSTATE OF U.P.

The Allahabad High Court considered a bail application filed by Ranjan Yadav under Section 2/3(1) of the U.P. Gangsters and Antisocial Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986. The applicant contended that the FIR was vague, did not allege any act falling within the definition of "gang" or "gangster", and …

ASHIK RAJPOOTversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court considered a bail application filed by Ashik Rajpoot, who was charged under Section 109 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3, 25 and 27 of the Arms Act for allegedly firing on a police party. The applicant claimed he was falsely implicated, noting that no police were injured, he …

RADHESHYAM @ RADHESHYAM SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P.

The applicant, Radheshyam Singh, was arrested along with co‑accused Ankit Yadav at a petrol pump and charged under several sections of the Essential Commodities Act and related statutes. He contended that he was falsely implicated, had no involvement in the alleged fuel‑related offences, and …

SHADABversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court considered a bail application filed by Shadab under Sections 2 and 3 of the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti‑Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986. The applicant argued that the FIR was vague, did not specifically allege acts defining a "gang" or "gangster", and that he had …

SUBHASH YADAVversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court of Allahabad considered a bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 on behalf of accused Subhash Yadav, who was in custody for offences under Sections 420, 406, 467, 468, 471 and 506 of the IPC. The applicant’s counsel argued that he was …

SURAJ @ MUKHIYAversusSTATE OF U.P.

The applicant, Suraj @ Mukhiya, sought bail in a case filed under Sections 2 and 3 of the U.P. Gangsters and Anti‑Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, alleging that the FIR was vague and did not disclose a specific gang‑related offence. The applicant argued that he had previously been granted …

UMMUL KHAIR FATIMAversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioner, Ummul Khair Fatima, filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing the District Minority Welfare Officer, Kanpur Nagar, to decide a grievance dated 04‑03‑2025 and to disburse her family pension after her father's death. The father, an assistant teacher, died on 27‑11‑2020 and the …

SAUDANversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The High Court considered a bail application filed under Section 483 of the BNSS for the accused Saudan, who was charged under Sections 140(4), 351(3) of the BNSS and Sections 5M/6 of the POCSO Act. The applicant claimed false implication, pointing out a four‑day delay between the alleged incident …

NAVED URF DULHAversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court of Allahabad considered a bail application filed by Naved Urf Dulha, who was arrested under Sections 2 and 3 of the U.P. Gangsters and Antisocial Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986. The applicant argued that the FIR was vague, did not disclose any act falling within the definition of …

AJIJ AHMADversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court considered a bail application filed by Ajij Ahmad in a case under Sections 8 and 18 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act, 1985, where 300 grams of alleged opium was recovered. The applicant argued that the recovery was false, there was no independent witness, …

MAHENDRA PRATAP SINGH DOHAREversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The petitioner, Mahendra Pratap Singh Dohare, filed a writ petition seeking payment of arrears of salary. The petition was filed without any specific supporting documents and the annexed representation was vague. The Court observed that the prayer was not backed by concrete evidence but, in the …

KUSHMA DEVIversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 4 OTHERS

The petitioner, Kushma Devi, filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing the State of Uttar Pradesh and other respondents to pay arrears of family pension and other pecuniary benefits due after the death of her husband, a Class‑IV employee, on 06‑11‑2017. The petitioner alleged that while …

NEERAJ KUMAR SINGHAIversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioner, Neeraj Kumar Singhai, who was engaged as a Part‑Time Instructor, filed a writ petition seeking renewal of his engagement. He alleged that the authorities had not acted on his request for renewal. The Court observed that the prayers in the petition were not properly framed. However, …

DEERAJ KUMAR UPADHYAY @ DEENUversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court considered a bail application filed by Deeraj Kumar Upadhyay, accused in a case under Sections 420, 386, 467, 468, 471 and 120‑B of the Indian Penal Code. The applicant claimed innocence, arguing that the FIR was lodged seven months after the alleged incident, that his name only …

SUDHANSHU CHAUHAN @ S.K. CHAUHANversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The High Court of Allahabad considered a bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 on behalf of Sudhanshu Chauhan, who was in custody for offences under Sections 309(4) and 317(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The applicant claimed innocence, …

TAHABBUR MEWATIversusSTATE OF U.P.

Tahabbur Mewati was arrested in connection with a murder case (Cr. No. 331 of 2025) after an informer implicated him along with two co‑accused. The applicant contended that he was not named in the FIR, no weapon was recovered from him, and the confessional statements of co‑accused did not allege any …

SURESH KUMARversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioner, a Class‑IV employee, filed a representation against a disciplinary order in 2013 but only appealed to the Deputy Director, Panchayat Raj, Bareilly on 16 May 2025, more than twelve years later. The appeal was dismissed on the ground of laches. The petitioner argued that unavoidable …

DILSHADversusSTATE OF U.P.

The applicant, Dilshad, sought bail in a criminal case (Crime No. 422 of 2025) involving alleged offences under the Indian Penal Code, the B.N.S., and the Information Technology Act. He argued that he was not named in the FIR and was only implicated by statements of co‑accused arrested at the scene, …

SHRIDHAR PANDEYversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

Shridhar Pandey filed a writ petition seeking enforcement of an order dated 21 September 2022 issued in Writ‑A No. 1037 of 2011. The respondent argued that the petitioner could be denied the benefit because he had not filed a certified copy of that order before the concerned respondent. The court …

SARTAJversusSTATE OF U.P.

The Allahabad High Court considered a bail application filed by Sartaj in a case registered under Section 2/3 of the U.P. Gangsters and Anti‑Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986. The applicant contended that the FIR was vague, did not satisfy the statutory definition of a "gang" or "gangster", …

RANNO DEVIversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 4 OTHERS

Ranno Devi filed a petition under Section 528 of the B.N.S.S. seeking to quash an order of the Additional Sessions Judge who had treated her application under Section 173(4) of the B.N.S.S. as a mere complaint. The applicant alleged that her daughter was enticed away by accused No.4 and No.5 on …

HARSHIT GUPTAversusSTATE OF U.P.

Harshit Gupta was arrested in a case under Sections 8 and 18 of the NDPS Act for alleged possession of 500 g of opium. He contended that the recovery was false, there was no independent witness, the seized quantity was below commercial levels, and mandatory provisions of Sections 42, 50, 51 and 52‑A …

AMARJEET YADAVversusSTATE OF U.P.

Amarjeet Yadav applied for bail in a criminal case (Crime No.24 of 2026) filed under Sections 2 and 3(1) of the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti‑Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986. The applicant argued that the FIR was vague, did not allege any act fitting the definition of a "gang" or …

ISLAMversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court considered a bail application filed by Islam, who was charged under Sections 3, 5A and 8 of the Cow Slaughter Act and Section 11Gha of the Animals Cruelty Act. The applicant argued that he was not named in the FIR and was only implicated by a co‑accused’s statement, which the court …

FIRASAT @ LALAversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court considered a bail application filed by Firasat @ Lala under Sections 8 and 20 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act in a case involving alleged recovery of 1,140 grams of charas. The applicant argued that the recovery was false, there was no independent witness, …

RAM NARAYAN VERMA AND 25 OTHERSversusSTATE OF UP AND 4 OTHERS

The petitioners, a group of 26 teachers including Ram Narayan Verma, filed a writ petition seeking payment of salary for periods during which they served as Ad hoc/Officiating Headmasters. They contended that they were entitled to the same remuneration as regular headmasters for the duties …

SHYAMDEVversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 6 OTHERS

The petitioner filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing the second respondent to decide a pending case (Shyamdev v. Gaon Sabha) under Section 24 of the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006, which had been delayed since 2024 despite several dates being fixed. The petitioner argued that the …

MOHD. ALIversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court considered a bail application filed by Mohd. Ali, who was detained on 13‑03‑2026 in a case under the U.P. Gangsters and Anti‑Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986. The applicant argued that the FIR was vague and did not satisfy the definition of a "gang" or "gangster" under Section …

MANISH PANDEYversusSTATE OF U.P.

Manish Pandey applied for anticipatory bail in a case involving alleged offences under Sections 318(4) and 3(5) of the BNSS Act and Section 66(D) of the Information Technology Act, based on nine suspicious transactions dated 06.05.2024. The FIR was lodged nearly two years after the transactions, and …

SABHAJEET SINGH AND 2 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The applicants filed an application under Section 528 of the Criminal Procedure Code seeking to quash the criminal proceedings (Complaint Case No. 1610 of 2024) pending before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jaunpur, alleging that the dispute is a family matter that could be settled …

SWAMI GAJANAND SARASWATIversusSHRI SATYENDRA KUMAR AND ANOTHER

The applicant, Swami Gajanand Saraswati, filed a contempt application under Section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, alleging that the opposite parties willfully disobeyed a judgment dated 12 January 2026 in Writ Petition No. 39828 of 2025. The court noted that a copy of the order had been …

GANGACHARANversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 10 OTHERS

The petitioner filed a writ petition challenging an order of the revisional court that remanded the proceedings back to the lower court for a fresh decision. The petitioner alleged that the revisional court had acted illegally in remanding the case. The High Court examined the record and the …

RAMESH SINGH @ RAMESHCHANDversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 5 OTHERS

The petitioner, Ramesh Singh, filed a writ petition challenging an order of the first appellate court in proceedings under Section 116 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006. The respondents, the State of U.P. and others, raised a preliminary objection that the petitioner had an alternative remedy of filing …

NARESH KUMAR @ GUNDAversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court considered a bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, on behalf of Naresh Kumar, who was arrested in a case under Sections 21 and 22 of the NDPS Act for allegedly possessing 463 g of diazepam powder. The applicant argued that he was …

SALIGRAM AND 5 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The applicants filed an application under Section 528 of the B.N.S.S. seeking to quash the criminal proceedings (Complaint Case No. 75580 of 2023) filed under Sections 452 and 323 of the IPC, alleging that the case stemmed from a civil dispute and was instituted maliciously. The court observed that …

CHHOTAK @ CHHOTKAN @ VISHAMBHARversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioner, Chhotak @ Chhotkan Vishambhar, filed a writ petition under Article 226 seeking a mandamus directing the Sub‑Divisional Magistrate of Barhaj, Deoria, to decide a suit filed under Section 116 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, which had been pending since 2025. The petitioner argued that …

ABHI KHATRI ALIAS ABHISHEKversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court considered a bail application filed by Abhi Khatri (Abhishek) in a murder case (Crime No. 1184 of 2025) under CrPC sections 103(1), 190 and 191. The applicant argued that the prosecution’s case was based solely on a non‑eyewitness statement implicating him, that the co‑accused had …

GITAversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 9 OTHERS

A public interest litigation (PIL) was filed by Gita against the State of Uttar Pradesh and nine other respondents. The petitioner, through counsel Damodar Pandey, initially sought relief from the court. During the hearing, the petitioner’s counsel requested to withdraw the writ petition. The court …

ARVIND KUMAR YADAVversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 4 OTHERS

Arvind Kumar Yadav filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing the respondents to expedite the pending case No. 10830 of 2025, which is filed under Section 24 of the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006. The petitioner argued that despite several dates being fixed, the case remained undecided …

VIJAY SINGHversusTHE STATE OF U.P. AND 6 OTHERS

The petitioner, Vijay Singh, filed a public interest litigation seeking a court order to halt the construction of a Barat Ghar on plot no.996 in Village Tosh, Mathura, alleging that the site adjoined the Gram Pradhan's land and that villagers were not properly consulted. The petitioner claimed the …

MOHD RAJAversusSTATE OF U.P.

The applicant, Mohd Raja, filed an anticipatory bail application under CrPC Section 482 in anticipation of arrest in a case involving alleged offences under sections 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2), 352 and 351(3) of the BNSS. He contended that the FIR falsely implicated him, alleging that the …

AJAJ MOHAMMAD @ EJAJversusSMT. NARGIS KHAN

The petitioner, Ajaj Mohammad, filed a petition under Article 227 seeking an order for the expeditious disposal of G.W. Petition No.112 of 2025. The court noted that the respondent, Smt. Nargis Khan, had not been served because of an incorrect address, and a separate application for proper service …

RENU GUPTAversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 5 OTHERS

The petitioner, Renu Gupta, filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing the State of U.P. and other respondents to consider his claim for promotion to Lecturer (English) under the 50% quota as per the U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921 and the U.P. Secondary Education Service Commission …

DANISHversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court of Allahabad considered a bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, on behalf of Danish, who is charged under Sections 2 and 3(1) of the U.P. Gangsters and Antisocial Activities (Prevention) Act. The applicant claimed innocence, asserted …

M/S JAI BAJRANG ENTERPRISESversusVANDANA VERMA AND ANOTHER

The applicant, M/s Jai Bajrang Enterprises, filed a contempt application under Section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act alleging that the opposite parties, Vandana Verma and another, willfully disobeyed a judgment and order dated 27‑01‑2026 issued in Writ Petition No.43316 of 2025. The order was …

MAHESH CHANDversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioner, Mahesh Chand, owner of a commercial premises in Varanasi, filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing the District Magistrate to decide a representation dated 22‑04‑2025 and to award compensation of Rs.1,83,60,000 at the commercial valuation rate of Rs.90,000 per square metre, …

RAMPALversusSRI DR. RAJENDER PENSIYA DISTRICT MAGISTRATE

The applicant, Rampal, filed a contempt application under Section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act alleging that the opposite party, Sri Dr. Rajender Pensiya, District Magistrate, willfully disobeyed a judgment dated 29 May 2025 in Writ Petition No.16610 of 2025. The order was served to the opposite …

SUSHILA KUMARI (CONTRACTUAL WARD AYA)versusSTATE OF U.P AND 4 OTHERS

The appellant, Sushila Kumari, a contractual employee engaged by the private firm Avani Paridhi Energy and Communications Ltd., challenged her disengagement before the High Court of Allahabad. The single judge observed that the dispute was purely between private parties and that a contractual …

GHANSHYAM PATEL AND 2 OTHERSversusROHIT AGRAWAL AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioners, Ghanshyam Patel and two others, filed a prayer for the expeditious disposal of an injunction application (6-C in O.S. 326 of 2023) that had been pending for three years before the trial court. They highlighted that objections were filed on 08.12.2023 but the trial court failed to …

RAMPRAWESH GUPTAversusMR KUMAR AMRENDRA, DISTRICT PANCHAYAT RAJ OFFICER

The High Court of Allahabad heard a contempt application filed under Section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act by Ramprawesh Gupta against Kumar Amrendra for allegedly refusing to obey a judgment dated 10‑11‑2025 in Writ Petition No.16602 of 2025. The order was served on the opposite party on …

YOGESHversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The applicant Yogesh filed an application under Section 528 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking to quash a non‑bailable warrant issued by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kasganj, in a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The High Court noted that the applicant could …

ABRAN @ BINGO KHAN AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court considered a bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 on behalf of Abran @ Bingo Khan, who was in custody for offences under Sections 309(6) and 317(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The applicant claimed innocence and pointed to …

SHIVAM PATELversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court considered a bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, on behalf of Shivam Patel, who was arrested in a cyber‑fraud case (Crime No. 72 of 2025) involving Sections 318(4), 338, 61(2) of the BNS and Section 66(d) of the IT Act. The …

FULMATIversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioner, Fulmati, filed a writ petition under Section 33(1) of the Uttar Pradesh Land Revenue Code, 2006, seeking a mandamus directing the second respondent (a lower court) to decide the pending case T20220547011095 (Fulmati vs. Nageshar) which had been delayed since 2022 despite several …

PARVEEN BANOversusSHASHANT SHEKHAR / TEHSILDAR TEHSIL-SADAR, MANDAL VINDHYACHAL

Parveen Bano filed a writ petition (Writ Petition No. 17144 of 2025) which was disposed by the Allahabad High Court on 27 May 2025. The order was personally served to the opposite party, Shashant Shekhar/Tehsildar, on 21 Oct 2025, but the party failed to comply with the directions. Consequently, the …

VISHNUversusSTATE OF U.P.

The applicant, husband of a woman who died within 13 months of marriage, sought bail in a dowry death case (Criminal No. 376 of 2024) alleging that the death was a suicide and that the post‑mortem report was erroneous. The prosecution argued that the post‑mortem indicated strangulation, making it a …

JITENDRA @ JEETU SAVITAversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The High Court considered a bail application filed by Jitendra @ Jeetu Savita, husband of a deceased woman, in a case (Crime No. 0201 of 2025) alleging abetment of suicide under Sections 85 and 108 of the B.N.S. Act and Sections 3/4 of the D.P. Act. The applicant argued that the death was due to …

GOPESHWAR SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 7 OTHERS

The petitioner, Gopeshwar Singh, filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing the Naib Tehsildar of Rudrapur to decide a pending revenue case (RST/1174/2025) concerning a land mutation. The petition alleged that despite several dates being fixed since 2025, the respondent had not rendered a …

VISHAL @ SHUBHNIT TRIVEDIversusSTATE OF U.P.

Vishal @ Shubhnit Trivedi was arrested in Crime No. 0010 of 2024 for alleged offences under Sections 420, 406, 467, 468, 471 of the IPC and Sections 66-C, 66-D of the IT Act. He has been in custody since 30‑12‑2025 and claims innocence, asserting that the only link to him is a mention in the …

MEHARBAN AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court considered a bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, for two accused in a case registered under Sections 2 and 3 of the U.P. Gangsters and Antisocial Activities (Prevention) Act. The applicants contended that they were falsely …

SURYA PRATAP SHARMA AND 177 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioners, a group of 178 individuals, filed Writ‑A No. 5570 of 2026 challenging a governmental action. The petition was dismissed because the supporting affidavit was executed by a pairokar who had no disclosed relationship with the petitioners, who reside in different districts, and the …