Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Judgments of 2026

15781 judgments · newest first · showing 13401–13600

SHUBHAM AGARWAL AND 5 OTHERSversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioners, Shubham Agarwal and five others, filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition before the Allahabad High Court seeking relief. 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 …

MOHIT MISHRAversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

Mohit Mishra filed Criminal Miscellaneous Writ Petition No. 18651 of 2025 before the Allahabad High Court. The petitioner’s counsel, Syed Mohammad Abbas Abdy, was not present at the hearing. No interim order had been passed in the matter. The Court observed that the petition had become infructuous …

SMT. SHABNAM AND 3 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

Smt. Shabnam and three others filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from arrest. No counsel appeared for the petitioners. The Attorney General for the State informed the court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of …

AJAY KUMAR SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioner, Ajay Kumar Singh, filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition before the Allahabad High Court seeking relief against the State of U.P. and two others. No counsel appeared for the petitioner and no interim order was passed. The court observed that the petition had become infructuous …

ARUN KUMAR AND 6 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

Arun Kumar and six 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, noting the existence of an interim …

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

Petitioners Ummed Singh and two others filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking protection 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 …

ANUJ YADAV AND 2 OTHERSversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioners filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from arrest after a charge sheet was filed against them. The State’s counsel was uncertain whether the trial court had taken cognizance of the police report. The High Court noted that while the charge sheet existed, the …

SUNEETA PATELversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

Petitioner Suneeta Patel filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition before the Allahabad High Court. The petitioner’s counsel was absent and no interim order had been passed. The court observed that the petition had become stale due to the passage of time. Consequently, the court held that the …

RAMBABU CHATURVEDIversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioner, Rambabu Chaturvedi, filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition before the Allahabad High Court. No counsel appeared for the petitioner and no interim order was made. The court observed that the petition had become infructuous due to the lapse of time. Consequently, the judges …

PRASHANT KUMAR PANDEY AND 4 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

Petitioners Prashant Kumar Pandey and four 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 …

ROSHAN ALI AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

Roshan Ali and another filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition before the Allahabad High Court against the State of Uttar Pradesh and two other respondents. The petitioner's counsel, Mohd. Naushad, was not present, and no interim order had been passed. The court observed that the petition had …

ANWAR HUSAIN AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

Anwar Husain and another filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition challenging their potential arrest. The State of U.P. submitted 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 …

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

Vidya and two others filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition challenging their potential 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, noting the existence of an …

GOURAV AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

Petitioners Gourav and another filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking protection from arrest. The State argued 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 …

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

The petitioners, Tinkal and four others, filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition before the Allahabad High Court against the State of Uttar Pradesh and two others. The parties attempted mediation, which ultimately failed. No counsel appeared on behalf of either side to argue the petition. The …

SUSHEEL KUMARversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

Susheel Kumar filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition challenging his potential 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, noting the existence of an interim order, …

PRANAY KUMAR SETH AND 6 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioners, Pranay Kumar Seth and six others, filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition before the Allahabad High Court against the State of Uttar Pradesh and three others. The petition sought relief after a mediation process between the parties failed. The court noted that no counsel …

NARENDRA @ NARENDRA PALversusSTATE OF U.P & 3 OTHERS

The petitioners, Narendra @ Narendra Pal, filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from arrest. The State of Uttar Pradesh and three others responded, indicating that a charge sheet had already been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of the …

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

The petitioners, Parvej 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. In …

AMBRISH PRATAP SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

Ambrish Pratap Singh 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 of an interim order in the …

DIVYANSH MUDGAL @ AYUSH AND 5 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioners filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition (No. 18823 of 2025) before the Allahabad High Court. After the charge-sheet was submitted in the underlying criminal case, the petitioners, through counsel, sought to withdraw the writ petition. The respondents opposed the withdrawal. The …

BHOLE VERMAversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioner, Bhole Verma, 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 High …

SHIVBHAN SINGH ALIAS BETA AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioners, Shivbhan Singh alias Beta and another, filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking protection from arrest. They contended that although a charge sheet had been filed by the investigating officer, it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of the police …

SHAHBAZversusSTATE OF UP AND 2 OTHERS

Shahbaz filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking protection from 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 whether …

SAUD ALIAS HATELAversusSTATE 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 Saud alias Hatela, who was in custody since July 15, 2025 for offences under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 190, 115(2), 352, 351(2), 109(1) and 308(2) of the …

CHANKIT KHOSLAversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

Chankit Khosla filed Criminal Revision No. 5435 of 2025 before the Allahabad High Court. During the hearing, the revisionist’s counsel, Dhiraj Kumar Pandey, informed the Court that the revisionist no longer wished to pursue the revision and prayed for its dismissal as not pressed. The State’s A.G.A. …

ANSHUL AGARWALversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The applicant filed an application under Section 528 of the BNSS seeking to quash criminal proceedings (Case No. 32608 of 2014) instituted under IPC sections 406 and 420, on the ground that the parties had entered into a verified compromise dated 23 July 2025. Both the applicant’s counsel and the …

RAJESH AND 3 OTHERSversusState of UP 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 16 April 2026 indicating that a charge-sheet had already been filed by the …

SMT SWATI AND ANOTHERversusState of UP AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioners, Smt Swati and another, filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition in the Allahabad High Court challenging the FIR lodged against them. The State, represented by the learned Additional Government Advocate, submitted an office report dated 16 April 2026 indicating that the …

SMT VAISHALI AND ANOTHERversusState of U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

Petitioners Smt Vaishali and another filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition in the Allahabad High Court challenging the FIR lodged against them. The State, represented by the Additional Government Advocate, submitted an office report dated 16‑04‑2026 indicating that a charge‑sheet had already …

RAKESH SHARMA AND 5 OTHERSversusState of UP AND 2 OTHERS

Petitioners Rakesh Sharma and five 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 learned Additional Government Advocate, submitted an office report dated 16-04-2026 indicating that …

SMT. SAVITA YADAV AND ANOTHERversusState of UP AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioners, Savita Yadav and another, filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition in the Allahabad High Court challenging the registration of an FIR. The State, represented by the Additional Government Advocate, submitted an office report dated 16 April 2026 indicating that a charge-sheet had …

SAURABH SINGHversusState of UP AND 4 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 …

HARSHIT GUPTA AND 3 OTHERSversusState of UP AND 3 OTHERS

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

VINAY AND 3 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The applicants filed a Section 528 B.N.S.S. application seeking to quash Criminal Case No. 337 of 2022 and the charge‑sheet dated 19‑Jan‑2019, which arose from offences under Sections 323, 504 and 506 IPC. The applicants and the second opposite party asserted that they had amicably settled the …

JAI SINGH AND ANOTHERversusState of UP AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioners, Jai Singh and another, filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition challenging the registration of the FIR against them. The State, represented by the Assistant Government Advocate, submitted that a charge‑sheet had already been filed, as per a report dated 16‑04‑2026 from the …

MAHENDRA ALIAS SONU RAJBHAR AND 2 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The Allahabad High Court entertained an application under Section 528 of the BNSS seeking to quash the criminal proceedings (Special S.T. No.384 of 2023) against Mahendra alias Sonu Rajbhar and others for offences under Sections 363, 366, 376, 506 IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the POCSO Act. The …

SMT SANGEETA KUMARI AND ANOTHERversusState of UP AND 3 OTHERS

Petitioners Smt Sangeeta Kumari and another 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 …

SMT KOMAL LAKHANIversusState of U.P. AND ANOTHER

The High Court examined a criminal revision filed by Smt Komal Lakhani challenging a Family Court order that granted her Rs 15,000 per month as maintenance from her husband, effective only from March 2022. The court noted that the parties were married in 2014, cohabited for less than a month, and …

SHANE ARAB AND 2 OTHERSversusState of U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

Shane Arab and two others filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking protection from arrest. The State of U.P. submitted a charge sheet, but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of the police report. The petitioners argued that arrest should not be permitted until …

HUKUMAT RAI SHADIJA AND 3 OTHERSversusState of UP AND 2 OTHERS

Petitioners Hukumat Rai Shadija and three others filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking protection 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 …

VAISHNAVI AND ANOTHERversusState of UP AND 3 OTHERS

Vaishnavi and another filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition before the Allahabad High Court seeking protection from arrest. The State had already filed a charge sheet, but it was uncertain whether the trial court had taken cognizance of the police report. The High Court observed that an …

AJAY KUMAR YADAV AND 3 OTHERSversusState of UP AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioners, Ajay Kumar Yadav and three others, filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from arrest. The State, represented by the Additional Attorney General, informed the court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken …

SMT SHIVANI GUPTA @ SUNITA GUPTA AND ANOTHERversusState of UP AND 3 OTHERS

Petitioners Smt Shivani Gupta and another 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 …

SONI SAVITA AND 3 OTHERSversusState of UP AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioners 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 report. The Court …

SON SINGH YADAV @ SONU YADAVversusState of UP AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioner, Son Singh Yadav, 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 …

SMT SAMREEN AND 2 OTHERSversusState of UP AND 2 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 the police report. The High Court noted the existence of an interim order in the …

RAHUL SINGHversusState of UP AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioner, Rahul Singh, filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition challenging the prospect of his arrest. The State, represented by 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 Court noted …

USHA DEVIversusState of UP AND 3 OTHERS

Usha Devi filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition challenging her potential 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 uncertainty regarding cognizance and, considering …

SMT. ARISHA AND ANOTHERversusState of UP AND 3 OTHERS

Petitioners Smt. Arisha 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 it. The High Court …

MANTU KUMAR SINGHversusState of U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioners 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 High Court noted …

RIZWAN SAIYAB SIDDIQUI AND 2 OTHERSversusState of UP AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioners, Rizwan Saiyab Siddiqui and two others, filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking protection from arrest. They argued that although a charge sheet had been filed by the investigating officer, the court had not yet taken cognizance of the police report. The State, …

SHAHRUKH AND 9 OTHERSversusState of U.P. AND 4 OTHERS

The petitioners, Shahrukh and nine others, filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition before the Allahabad High Court. 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. In the absence of …

AJIT SINGHversusSRI SANJAY MISHRA, SUB DIVISIONAL MAGISTRATE, TEHSIL-KHAIR

The applicant, Ajit Singh, filed a contempt application against Sub Divisional Magistrate Sanjay Mishra after a writ court order dated 21.08.2024. The opposite party filed a compliance affidavit on 10.03.2026 stating that the writ order had been complied with and that proceedings under Section 38 of …

JAY BHARAT BHAI THAKKARversusSTATE OF U.P.

The applicant, Jay Bharat Bhai Thakkar, filed a criminal miscellaneous bail application before the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad. Counsel for the applicant, Shantanu, announced at the Bar his intention to withdraw the bail application. The court, noting the applicant's intention to withdraw, …

MOHIT PANWAR AND 3 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The applicants filed a Section 528 B.N.S.S. application seeking to quash the charge sheet and criminal proceedings (Case No. 10337 of 2025) arising from offences under Sections 221, 121(1), 132, 352 and 351(3). The parties had amicably settled the dispute, and the trial court verified the …

TINKU ALIAS RAM SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The applicant, Tinku alias Ram Singh, filed an application under Section 528 of the BNSS seeking to quash the criminal proceedings (Special Case No.27 of 2000, Crime No.52 of 2016) pending before the Special Judge, POCSO Court, Bareilly, which were based on IPC sections 363, 366, 376(2)(n) and …

NAYAMUDDINversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The applicant, Nayamuddin, filed a criminal miscellaneous application under Section 528 of the CrPC seeking to quash the charge‑sheet and proceedings in a case pending under Sections 363 and 366 IPC. The applicant and the second opposite party had reached a compromise, which was acknowledged by both …

UMA SHANKARversusState of UP AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioner filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition challenging the FIR filed against him. The State, represented by the learned Additional Government Advocate, submitted that a charge-sheet had already been filed, as per a report dated 16-04-2026 from the Legal Cell of the Director General …

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

The applicants filed an application under Section 528 of the B.N.S.S. seeking to quash criminal proceedings (Case No. 488 of 2022) arising from offences under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and Sections 3/4 D.P. Act. They claimed that the parties had amicably settled the dispute by a compromise …

VIJAY 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 Vijay Singh, who was arrested in a case under Sections 8 and 20 of the NDPS Act for alleged possession of 16.398 kg of charas. Singh contended that he had been falsely …

AMRIT DEEPAK TRIPATHI AND 7 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The applicants filed an application under Section 528 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking to quash criminal case No. 35366 of 2024, which involved offences under Sections 147, 323, 504 and 506 IPC, on the ground that they had reached a compromise with the opposite party. Both parties admitted …

AMIT KUMAR CHAUDHARYversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The applicant Amit Kumar Chaudhary filed an application under Section 528 of the Criminal Procedure Code seeking to quash criminal case No.3089 of 2025, which alleged offences under Sections 409, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120B of the IPC relating to alleged short‑supply of paddy. He contended that the …

VINAY KUMAR ALIAS ASHISHversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The applicant, Vinay Kumar alias Ashish, sought bail in a criminal case (Crime No. 461 of 2025) involving alleged offences under Sections 65(2) and 351(3) of the BNS Act and Sections 5m/6 of the POCSO Act, where a 10‑year‑old girl was the victim. The applicant claimed innocence, alleging that a …

RAVINDRA KUMARversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 5 OTHERS

Ravindra Kumar filed a public interest litigation seeking a court direction to remove illegal encroachments on Plot No.256, recorded as a manure pit, by respondent No.6. The Tehsildar's instructions revealed that a pucca house occupies 0.0100 hectare and a Panchayat Bhawan occupies 0.0200 hectare of …

SMT. GUNJAN SHARMA AND 2 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The applicants filed an application under Section 528 of the Criminal Procedure Code seeking to quash a charge‑sheet and the pending criminal case (Case No. 266 of 2016) arising from offences under Sections 420, 467, 468 and 471 IPC. The applicants and the second opposite party had reached a …

TANVEER AHMADversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court considered a bail application filed on behalf of Tanveer Ahmad in a criminal case (Crime No. 177 of 2025) under Sections 64(2)(M), 115(2) and 351(3) of the BNS. The applicant claimed innocence, asserted that the alleged victim was a consenting party, and highlighted his clean record …

RAZABversusSTATE 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 the accused Razaz, who was charged with multiple offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The applicant’s counsel argued that the FIR contained only …

ASIM KHANversusSTATE OF U.P.

Disposed off/Decided on merits

The High Court considered a bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, for Asim Khan who was arrested in a narcotics case under Sections 8 and 21 of the NDPS Act for allegedly possessing 500 grams of heroin. The applicant argued that the mandatory …

DEVENDRA PRATAP SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 8 OTHERS

The petitioner filed a public interest litigation seeking a court direction to remove illegal encroachments on Plot No.64, recorded as a main road in the revenue records of Village Kunjalpur, Tehsil Jalesar, District Etah. The encroachments, amounting to 0.080 hectare and 6 square metres, were made …

RAMBABU PAL AND 2 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The applicants filed an application under Section 528 of the BNSS seeking quash of criminal proceedings (Case No. 4047/2024) arising from alleged offences under IPC sections 323, 504 and 506. The applicants claimed that they had reached a full compromise with the opposite party, which was …

RANJEET SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 6 OTHERS

The petitioner, Ranjeet Singh, filed a public interest litigation seeking a writ of mandamus directing the State of Uttar Pradesh and others to remove alleged illegal encroachments by private respondents on several parcels of land recorded as Banjar, Abadi, and Chakmarg in the revenue records of …

SHARIQ ALIAS KASHIFversusSTATE OF U.P.

Shariq alias Kashif was arrested in connection with a case (Crime No. 244 of 2025) alleging offences under Sections 123, 64, 351(2) and 61(2)(a) of the IPC for allegedly circulating an indecent video. The victim’s statement under Section 183 BNSS expressly denied that the applicant made the video, …

SHIVAM YADAVversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The applicant, Shivam Yadav, filed an application under Section 528 of the Criminal Procedure Code before the Allahabad High Court. Counsel for the applicant, Praveen Kumar Mishra, informed the court that the applicant no longer wished to pursue the application. The court considered whether the …

NAFEESversusSTATE OF U.P.

The accused, Nafeus, applied for bail in a rape case (S.T. No.470 of 2025) arising from Case Crime No.454 of 2024. The applicant’s counsel argued that the victim was a consenting party, that both the victim and the accused sustained injuries, and that the allegations amounted to false implication. …

KAMAL SINGH AND 4 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The applicants filed an application under Section 528 of the BNSS Act seeking to quash the charge sheet and related criminal proceedings (Case No. 7869 of 2025) on the ground that they had reached a compromise with the opposite party, which was verified by the trial court. The opposite party …

X JUVENILEversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The High Court considered a criminal revision filed by a juvenile (aged 15 years, 10 months) seeking to quash the denial of bail by the Children's Court and Juvenile Justice Board. The revisionist argued that the juvenile was falsely implicated, had no criminal history, the FIR was lodged after an …

ROHIT PRAJAPATIversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The applicant, Rohit Prajapati, was arrested in connection with a case under Section 69 alleging that he had entered into a false promise of marriage and subsequently refused to fulfil it, leading to a claim of deception by a 26‑year‑old victim. The applicant contended that the allegations were …

SUBHAANversusSTATE OF U.P.

Subhaan filed a criminal miscellaneous bail application (No. 40620 of 2025) before the Allahabad High Court. During the hearing, counsel for the applicant announced his intention to withdraw the bail application. The court, noting this statement, dismissed the bail application as withdrawn. The …

VIKAS CHAUDHARYversusSTATE OF UP AND 2 OTHERS

Vikas Chaudhary filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking an ad‑interim mandamus directing the DGP of Lucknow to reinvestigate Crime No. 173 of 2023 under IPC sections 504 and 506 and to submit a fresh police report. The State argued that the investigating officer had already filed a …

GIRJA SHARAN SINGHversusSRI UMAKANT KUMAR AND 2 OTHERS

The applicant, Girja Sharan Singh, filed a contempt application against Sri Umakant Kumar and two others, alleging non‑compliance with a writ Court order. The applicant’s counsel, Ajay Kumar Srivastava, informed the Court that the writ order had been fully complied with, rendering the contempt …

JASIM AND 5 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The applicants filed an application under Section 528 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking to quash the charge sheet (No.145/2018) and related proceedings in a criminal case arising from offences under Sections 147, 323, 324, 352 and 506 of the IPC. Both the applicants and the second opposite …

RAVI KARANversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court of Allahabad considered a bail application filed by Ravi Karan, who was arrested in connection with a case under Sections 64(2)F, 115(2), 351(2) and 352 of the IPC, alleged to involve misuse of dowry laws. The applicant contended that he was falsely implicated, being the …

RANJEET SINGH AND 3 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The applicants filed an application under Section 528 of the CrPC seeking to quash the cognizance order dated 19‑12‑2024 and the entire criminal proceedings arising from FIR No. 159 of 2024, which alleged offences under Sections 147, 120B, 506, 420, 419 and 386 IPC. The applicants argued that they …

SONUversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The applicant Sonu filed an application under Section 528 of the BNSS seeking to quash the criminal case (Cr. No.9 of 2024) pending before the Special Judge (POCSO) in Bareilly, which alleged offences under Sections 363, 366, 376 IPC and Sections 3 and 4(2) of the POCSO Act. The applicant argued …

BABLU KASHYAPversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 5 OTHERS

The petitioner, Bablu Kashyap, filed a public interest litigation seeking a direction to the State of U.P. and other respondents to act against a sixth respondent for alleged illegal encroachment on Plot No. 424, which was recorded as Banjar/Naveen Parti in the revenue records. The Court examined …

SATENDRAversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioner challenged an externment order issued under Section 3 of the U.P. Control of Goondas Act, which was based on two pending criminal cases. The High Court examined the statutory definition of "goonda" and held that the term requires a pattern of habitual offences, not merely one or two …

RAJPALversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The High Court considered a bail application filed by Rajpal, who was charged under Sections 65(1), 352, 351(3) of the IPC and Sections 3(2) and 4(2) of the POCSO Act for alleged outraging the modesty of a 16‑year‑old girl, later escalated to rape. The applicant pleaded innocence, highlighted the …

SANJEEV KUMARversusSRI RAJESH KUMAR PANDEY, DISTRICT MAGISTRATE

The writ court on 5 August 2025 directed the District Magistrate to take a final decision in the matter raised by the applicant, Sanjeev Kumar. The applicant filed a contempt application alleging non‑compliance with that direction. On 13 April 2026 the District Magistrate issued the required …

GOVERDHAN ALIAS AJEETversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The petitioner, Goverdhan alias Ajeet, filed a criminal revision challenging the order dated 04.10.2025 that dismissed his discharge application in a case under Sections 376, 504 and 506 IPC. The Additional District and Sessions Judge had dismissed the discharge application and subsequently framed …

RAM SEWAKversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 8 OTHERS

Ram Sewak filed a public interest litigation seeking a court direction to remove illegal encroachments on Plot Nos. 503, 537 and 700 in Village Sakhaila, Jaunpur. The encroachments were made by individuals who had raised unauthorized constructions, and proceedings under Section 136 of the U.P. …

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

The applicants filed a Section 528 B.N.S.S. application seeking to quash a criminal proceeding initiated under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, in which the opposite party alleged domestic violence by her husband and his relatives. The court examined the …

SMT MAYA DEVIversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 19 OTHERS

The petitioner, Smt Maya Devi, claimed ownership of a land parcel based on a 1976 sale deed from Champa, which was later cancelled by a 1978 decree. Champa subsequently sold the same land to the contesting respondents in 1990 during the pendency of an appeal, and a 2007 compromise judgment dismissed …

PRABHANSH @ PARAMHANSH SINGH AND 4 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The applicants filed a Section 528 CrPC application to quash criminal case ST No.491/2008 (State v. Paramhansh Singh) involving offences under Sections 147, 148, 323, 504, 506 and 308 IPC. The parties had amicably settled the dispute and the trial court verified the compromise. Both the applicant …

GOVIND CHAUHAN AND 2 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 4 OTHERS

The Allahabad High Court entertained an application under Section 528 of the BNSS filed by Govind Chauhan and two relatives seeking to quash criminal proceedings (Sessions Case No.510 of 2022) arising from offences under IPC sections 363, 366, 376 and POCSO Act sections 3 and 4. The applicants …

BLIRAMversusSRI PRATAP SINHG BAGHEL AND ANOTHER

The High Court, while disposing of Writ-A No. 14196 of 2025 on 19 September 2025, directed the opposite party to decide the representation of the applicant. The opposite party filed a compliance affidavit stating that the representation was decided on 13 April 2026. The court held that since the …

EKTA LUNIA AND ANOTHERversusUNION OF INDIA AND 4 OTHERS

The applicants, Ekta Lunia and another, filed an application under Section 528 of the BNSS Act seeking to quash an order of the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate of Ghaziabad who refused to renew their passports on the ground of a pending criminal case. The High Court had earlier allowed their …

BALIRAMversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The applicant, Baliram, filed an application under Section 528 of the B.N.S.S. seeking to quash the charge sheet and cognizance order in a theft case (Sections 457, 380, 411 IPC) filed against him. He alleged that the investigation was flawed, there were no eyewitnesses, and the magistrate had taken …

SNEHANSH UPADHYAYversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The applicant, Snehansh Upadhyay, filed an application under Section 528 of the BNSS Act seeking to quash the criminal proceedings arising from FIR No.126 of 2024 and the charge‑sheet dated 30‑08‑2024 under Section 305 BNSS, as well as a summoning order dated 17‑02‑2025. The applicant and the second …

LOKESH PATHAKversusSTATE OF U.P.

The applicant, Lokesh Pathak, filed a criminal miscellaneous bail application (No. 44967 of 2025) before the Allahabad High Court. The application sought bail pending trial in a case instituted by the State of Uttar Pradesh. During the proceedings, the applicant, through counsel Mohammad Khalid and …

MITHIYO ALIAS MITHLESHversusSTATE OF U.P.

Mithiyo alias Mithlesh was arrested in connection with a case of assault leading to death, charged under several sections of the B.N.S. The FIR and eyewitness statements implicated eight persons but did not assign a specific role to Mithiyo, and the post‑mortem showed only one fatal head injury …

PUSHPENDRA SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court considered a bail application filed by Pushpendra Singh, who was in custody for offences under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120‑B of the IPC. The applicant claimed innocence and argued that the trial had not been concluded within 60 days of the first date fixed for taking evidence, …

MOHAMMAD SHARIFversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The applicant, Mohammad Sharif, filed a Section 528 application in the Allahabad High Court seeking to quash an order dated 26 June 2025 passed by the Additional Court (NI Act), Aligarh, in a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (Smt. Guddo Devi v. Mohammad Sharif). The …

SAQIBversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The High Court considered a bail application filed by Saqib, who was arrested in connection with a case registered under IPC sections 137(2), 64(1), 127(2) and sections 3/4(2) of the POCSO Act. The applicant contended that he was falsely implicated, that the FIR was lodged after a delay, and that …

SUMIT TOMARversusSTATE OF U.P AND 12 OTHERS

In PIL No. 4051 of 2025, petitioner Sumit Tomar sought a court direction to respondents 3 and 4 to remove alleged illegal encroachments by respondents 5‑7 on Plot Nos. 524 and 525 (recorded as Banjar and Pokhar) in Village Deta Khurd, Aligarh. The Deputy District Magistrate filed an affidavit …

NASIR RANA AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The applicants, Nasir Rana and another, filed an application under Section 528 of the B.N.S. seeking to quash Criminal Case No.17940/9 of 2025 pending before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Muzaffar Nagar. They contended that they were not named in the FIR dated 5‑12‑2024 and that their alleged …

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

The applicants filed a Section 528 BNSS application seeking to quash a notice dated 12‑July‑2024 and related proceedings in a domestic‑violence case (Case No. 127/12/24, Nitesh v. Amit). The applicants, who are in‑laws and a sister‑in‑law of the opposite party, alleged that the complaint filed by …

ASHISH CHAURASIYA AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The applicants, Ashish Chaurasiya and another, filed an application under Section 528 of the BNSS before the Allahabad High Court. During the hearing, Sri Lal Dev Chaurasia, appearing on behalf of the applicants, informed the court that the applicants no longer wished to pursue the application. The …

LAL MANIversusDEPUTY DIRECTOR OF CONSOLIDATION AND OTHERS

The petitioners filed applications to substitute the legal heirs of a deceased sole petitioner and several deceased respondents, also seeking condonation of delay under Section 5 of the Limitation Act. The court examined the affidavit explaining the delay and found it satisfactory, thereby condoning …

RAJBIRversusSTATE OF U.P.

The appellant Rajbir was convicted under Section 411 of the Indian Penal Code for robbery after being found in possession of a stolen starter during an incident involving theft and firing at a tubewell in Ghaziabad. The trial court sentenced him to one year of rigorous imprisonment, acquitting him …

GANESH PRASAD VERMAversusSRI KRISHNA KUMAR SINGH, DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF AGRICULTURE,

Dismiss other than merit(DD/Non Prosec./Abated)

Ganesh Prasad Verma filed a civil contempt application (No. 1996 of 2021) against Sri Krishna Kumar Singh, Deputy Director of Agriculture. The applicant was represented by counsel Kamal Nayan Tripathi and Senior Advocate Vivek Shandilya, while the opposite party was represented by K.R. Singh. The …

SMT. NEHA BAJPAYEE AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The applicants filed an application under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code seeking to quash Criminal Case No.14180 of 2021, which involved alleged offences under Sections 504 and 506 of the IPC. They asserted that they had reached a compromise with the opposite party and wished to avoid …

RAM CHANDRAversusSTATE OF U.P.

The appellant, Ram Chandra, filed a criminal appeal before the Allahabad High Court. During the pendency of the appeal, the Chief Judicial Magistrate of Hapur reported that the sole appellant had died. The court considered the effect of the appellant's death on the pending appeal. It held that an …

MANOJ KUMAR DWIVEDIversusSTATE OF U.P. and OTHERS

Dismiss other than merit(DD/Non Prosec./Abated)

The applicant, Manoj Kumar Dwivedi, filed an application under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code seeking the Court's interference in a matter pending since 2005. No counsel appeared for the applicant, while the State's Additional Government Advocate was present. The Court observed that the …

RICHA BHARGAVAversusSTATE OF U.P.

Richa Bhargava was arrested in a case alleging non‑payment of Rs 35 lakh to the informant’s firm and was denied bail by the lower court. The applicant contended that the dispute was purely commercial, arising from a debt recovery issue, and that the FIR was an abuse of process lacking the mens rea …

SUSHIL KUMAR YADAVversusSTATE OF UP

The High Court of Allahabad considered a bail application filed by Sushil Kumar Yadav, who is accused in a criminal case (Crime No. 01 of 2026) for alleged assault under Sections 109(1), 352, and 351(3). The applicant claimed absolute innocence, argued that the FIR lacked a motive, and highlighted a …

RAM NARESH YADAVversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioner, a constable in the Uttar Pradesh Police, sought to quash an order that denied his medical leave, salary for 86 days, and imposed a fine, alleging that his medical certificates were improperly rejected because they lacked the Chief Medical Officer's countersignature. He had been on …

VIJAY SINGH SHAKYA ALIAS BABLU SHAKYAversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court considered a bail application filed by Vijay Singh Shakya, who is accused in a case under Sections 420, 467, 468, 461 and 120‑B of the Indian Penal Code. The applicant’s counsel argued that he was falsely implicated, that the FIR was lodged with delay, and that no direct evidence …

RAJ KUMAR SHASHTRIversusD.I.O.S.FAIZABAD AND ANORS

Dismiss other than merit(DD/Non Prosec./Abated)

Petitioner Raj Kumar Shashtri filed a writ petition in 2006 before the Allahabad High Court, Lucknow Bench. No counsel appeared on his behalf, though the Standing Counsel for the court was present. The petition remained pending for many years and the petitioner appeared to have lost interest in …

KAILESH NATH and ANR.versusSMT. ASHA DEVI

Dismiss other than merit(DD/Non Prosec./Abated)

The appellants, Kailesh Nath and others, filed a second appeal (No. 299 of 2017) before the Allahabad High Court. No counsel appeared on their behalf, and no request for adjournment or further prosecution of the appeal was made. The court noted the absence of representation and the lack of any …

GIRRAJversusSTATE OF U.P.

The appellant Girraj was convicted by a Special Judge under Section 411 of the IPC for possessing documents related to a tractor involved in a murder case, and sentenced to one year of rigorous imprisonment. The conviction was based solely on the recovery of registration papers from his possession, …

SHYAM PAL SINGH AND OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P.

The appellants were convicted by the Additional Sessions Judge, Mainpuri, for voluntarily causing hurt under Section 324 IPC and sentenced to two years' rigorous imprisonment. They appealed, seeking the benefit of probation under Section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958, with the State's …

SURAJ BHAN SINGH AND 2 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P.

The appellants were convicted by the Sessions Judge in Bijnor for offences under IPC sections 324/34, 452 and 506 and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment and fines. Subsequently, the appellants and the injured parties (Asha Ram, Jai Pal and Dulari Devi) executed a compromise affidavit dated 25‑27 …

CHHOTE LAL AND 10 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The petitioners filed a criminal miscellaneous application under Section 482 of the CrPC challenging a summoning order dated 12‑07‑2017 and the underlying complaint (Case No. 1314 of 2016) alleging offences under Sections 323 and 506 IPC. They contended that the Judicial Magistrate had issued the …

RAJESH SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 6 OTHERS

The petitioner, Rajesh Singh, challenged the suspension order dated 14 January 2026 issued by the Director, Cooperative Societies and Panchayat Audit, Government of Uttar Pradesh. The court noted that the charge‑sheet had been served on the petitioner and an enquiry report was filed on 2 February …

ABHAY RAM YADAVversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioner, Abhay Ram Yadav, filed a writ petition before the Allahabad High Court. During the hearing, counsel for the petitioner requested that the petition be dismissed as withdrawn, with liberty to file a fresh petition. The respondents did not oppose this request. The Court, after noting …

VIRENDRA KUMAR SHARMAversusTHE STATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioner, a marginal farmer, sought a writ of mandamus directing the respondent bank to accept repayment of his Kisan Credit Card loan of Rs. 12,23,566 in reasonable installments. He argued that his age, limited means and inability to pay the entire amount in a lump sum warranted relief. The …

ANKIT JOHRI AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P.

The Allahabad High Court considered a bail application filed by Ankit Johri and Shiva Johri, who were arrested in connection with a GST evasion scheme alleged under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS). The applicants contended that they were merely data entry operators and that the alleged conduct …

DANISHversusSTATE OF U.P.

The applicant, Danish, filed a criminal miscellaneous bail application before the Allahabad High Court, with Sunil Kumar Dubey appearing as counsel. The State of U.P. was represented by Prabhakant Singh, G.A. During the hearing, counsel for the applicant informed the court that the applicant no …

GAUTAM KUMARversusSTATE OF UP AND 2 OTHERS

Gautam Kumar filed a writ petition seeking either appointment on compassionate grounds as a Home Guard volunteer or a monetary assistance of Rs.5,00,000 to his mother. The petition was heard before Hon'ble Justice Prakash Padia. The Court recorded instructions dated 14-04-2026 from the Deputy …

RAM DARASH GOND AND 3 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The appellants were summoned under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and IPC for allegedly assaulting the complainant and his son with lathi and iron rods and using caste‑related insults during a land‑possession dispute that is pending before a civil court. The appellants argued that the …

MUKHTYAR AHMADversusUNION OF INDIA

Mukhtyar Ahmad was arrested after a preventive customs team seized 167.5 kg of charas, hashish and ganja concealed in a Toyota Qualis vehicle. He was convicted under the NDPS Act and the Customs Act and sentenced to 15 years rigorous imprisonment with a fine of Rs.2,00,000 and five years …

JITENDRA RAWATversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

Jitendra Rawat filed an application under Section 528 of the Indian Penal Code challenging an interim maintenance order of Rs 5,000 per month issued by the Additional Principal Judge of the Family Court, Mathura, on the ground that his income was insufficient to meet the amount. The court examined …

ANSHUMAN SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioner, Anshuman Singh, sought a writ of mandamus directing the District Magistrate of Jaunpur to grant him a firearm licence and to issue a reasoned order on his application dated 23‑12‑2025. He argued that his father, who previously held a licence, is now elderly and infirm, and that …

GOVIND LAL SRIVASTAVAversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 5 OTHERS

The petitioner, Govind Lal Srivastava, filed a writ petition seeking a certiorari to quash several notices issued by the Joint Development Commissioner, Varanasi Division, alleging they were based on forged medical reimbursement bills. The respondent submitted instructions from the Commissioner …

RETIRED SUB-INSPECTOR RAJ KUMAR SINGHversusSTATE OF UP AND 2 OTHERS

Retired Sub‑Inspector Raj Kumar Singh filed a writ petition challenging an order dated 24‑12‑2024 that reduced his pensionable basic salary from Rs.66,200 to Rs.55,200. He sought quashing of that order and direction to restore his pension to the higher amount. The petitioner relied on the judgment …

HUSSAINversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The applicant, Hussain, filed an application under Section 528 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking bail. The High Court noted that both the learned counsel for the applicant and the learned senior government counsel were present. The applicant’s counsel, Amit Kumar Pandey, requested that the …

RAJESH KUMAR SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 5 OTHERS

The petitioner, Rajesh Kumar Singh, challenged the suspension order dated 29 July 2025 issued by the second respondent. The court noted that the charge-sheet and enquiry report had already been filed. After hearing both sides, the High Court directed the disciplinary authority to complete the …

RAJENDRA SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 4 OTHERS

The petitioner, Rajendra Singh, challenged three disciplinary orders: one dated 18‑09‑2024 (appeal rejected on 08‑11‑2024 and revision rejected on 24‑12‑2025), another dated 06‑02‑2025 (appeal rejected on 31‑05‑2025), and a pending revision against the latter. The Court held that the writ petition …

M/S HAMARA PUMP NASIRPUR HPC PETROL PUMPversusUNION OF INDIA AND 4 OTHERS

The petitioner, M/S Hamara Pump Nasirpur Hpc Petrol Pump, filed a writ petition before the Allahabad High Court. Subsequently, the petitioner filed a withdrawal application stating that the cause of action no longer survived and it no longer wished to pursue the writ. The Court examined the …

UMAR FAROOKversusSTATE OF UP AND 2 OTHERS

Disposed off/Decided on merits

Petitioner Umar Farook filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking to quash an FIR dated 30.05.2025 that alleged offences under Sections 318(4), 338, 336(3) and 340(2) of the B.N.S. He contended that his firm had previously been black‑listed and the FIR was lodged again after a year and …

KANHAIYA LAL CHAUHAN AND 153 OTHERSversusState of UP AND 3 OTHERS

Petitioners Kanhaiya Lal Chauhan and 152 others filed a writ petition before the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad seeking a copy of the English translation of a Government Order dated 23 May 2014. The petition was heard by Hon'ble Justices Arindam Sinha and Satya Veer Singh. Counsel for the …

ATUL KUMARversusState of U.P. AND ANOTHER

The revisionist Atul Kumar challenged an order of the Additional Session Judge, Basti, which summoned him under Section 302 IPC by invoking Section 319 of the Criminal Procedure Code. He argued that the court relied solely on uncorroborated oral statements of three witnesses and failed to record a …

ASIFversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The revisionist Asif challenged an order dated 24‑09‑2024 whereby the Additional Sessions Judge summoned him under Section 319 of the Criminal Procedure Code to stand trial in Sessions Trial No. 486. The revisionist argued that the trial court failed to record a satisfaction that the evidence on …

SHANTI DEVI AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The applicants, Shanti Devi and another, filed an application under Section 528 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking to quash criminal proceedings (Crimes No. 20 of 2013) pending before the Judicial Magistrate, Budaun, involving offences under IPC sections 420, 467, 468 and 471. The parties had …

KRISHNA VERMA @ K.K. VERMAversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The applicant, Krishna Verma, filed an application under Section 528 of the B.N.S.S. seeking to quash the cognizance and charge sheet in a criminal case involving offences under Sections 354, 354(Gha), 294, 504 and 506 IPC. During the hearing, the applicant’s counsel withdrew all other prayers and …

TUSHAR PANDEYversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The applicant, Tushar Pandey, filed an application under Section 528 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking to quash the charge‑sheet and the cognizance order in a criminal case (Cr. No. 655 of 2023) filed under Sections 323 and 506 IPC for alleged assault and criminal intimidation. The applicant …

MOHIT SINGH AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The applicants filed an application under Section 528 of the BNSS seeking to quash the charge‑sheet, cognizance order and the entire criminal proceedings (Criminal Case No. 23128 of 2025) arising from an FIR alleging assault under Sections 115(2), 352 and 351(3) BNS. They argued that the FIR was …

MASTER DIVYAM KUMAR AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioners filed a habeas corpus writ seeking custody of the minor child, Divyam Kumar, aged about five years. The State of U.P. and two private respondents were impleaded. The minor was produced before the court as per the order dated 16‑04‑2026. Counsel for the private respondents requested …

SAHAB SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P.

The appellant Sahab Singh was convicted by the Sessions Court under Sections 395 and 397 of the IPC for a dacoity alleged to have occurred on the night of 21‑22 May 1982, based primarily on identification by the informant Lakhan Singh and a witness Ramdhani. The identification parade was conducted …

RASHIDversusRABBANI AND OTHERS

The appellant Rashid appealed against the acquittal of the respondents in a criminal case where the trial court had found them not guilty under Sections 147, 148, 323, 324 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code. The appeal remained pending for more than forty years, during which the sole appellant died. …

ONKAR SINGH AND ANOTHERversusSTATE

The appellants Onkar Singh and Baran Singh were convicted by the trial court for attempt to murder under Section 307 read with Section 34 of the IPC and sentenced to four years' rigorous imprisonment. The conviction was based on testimony that the accused fired country‑made firearms, causing pellet …

RAM SINGH AND OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P.

The Special Judge convicted the appellants for murder and rioting, holding that they formed an unlawful assembly and opened fire on police, causing the death of Constable Rajendra Singh. On appeal, the High Court examined the prosecution’s evidence, particularly the identification testimony of …

VIDESHIversusSTATE

The appellant Nirthu was charged in a land‑dispute incident where he, armed with a spear, assaulted the complainant Balram and others, causing injuries. The trial court acquitted him of offences under Sections 147, 148, 307 and 149 IPC but convicted him under Sections 324/34 and 323/34 IPC for …

RAM RAKHHAversusSTATE OF U.P.

Ram Rakhha appealed his conviction for culpable homicide under Section 304 of the Indian Penal Code, for which the trial court sentenced him to ten years’ rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs.5,000. He contended that the trial court had erred in its appreciation of evidence and sought to have the …

DIVYANSH PANDEY @ TINKOO PANDEYversusSTATE OF U.P.

The appellant Divyansh Pandey appealed against his conviction for abetment of suicide (Sec. 306 IPC), dowry harassment (Sec. 498A IPC) and destruction of evidence (Sec. 201 IPC) stemming from the death of his wife, who was allegedly burned and hanged after dowry demands. The trial court relied on …

UJJWAL AMBESHversusSTATE OF U.P.

The appellant, Ujjwal Ambesh, challenged the order of the Second Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge (SC/ST Act) which dismissed his complaint after multiple investigations found no offence. The trial court detailed that several notices were served to the appellant at his residence, locked …

NAVEENversusSTATE OF U.P.

The applicant, Naveen, sought enlargement of bail in a criminal case (Cr.No. 756 of 2023) involving alleged offences under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120‑B IPC relating to a fraudulent property sale. The trial court had rejected his bail and he had been in custody since 13‑12‑2025. The …

SALMAN TOMAR AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court considered a bail application filed by Salman Tomar and Bhanu Chaudhary, accused in a vehicle‑theft case (Crime No. 51 of 2026). The applicants argued that their arrest and the recovery of stolen vehicles were illegal because procedural requirements under Sections 105 of the BNSS and …

SANGAM LALversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioner, Sangam Lal, filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing the District Magistrate of Fatehpur to decide his pending application dated 08‑01‑2026. He alleged that the licensing authority had suppressed material facts regarding a criminal case, which could affect the validity of …

MANOJ KUMAR YADAV AND ANOTHERversusUNION OF INDIA AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioners sought a compassionate appointment for the petitioner's married son after the death of their husband/father, who was a permanent Trackman. The respondents rejected the application, citing that the son was over 30, married, and the family was already receiving a settlement of …

MANSHA DEVIversusUNION OF INDIA AND 6 OTHERS

The petitioner, Mansha Devi, sought a compassionate appointment in the Eastern Central Railway after her father, a post trackman, died in 2019. The Central Administrative Tribunal had earlier set aside a rejection of her claim and directed her to prove dependency on her father at the time of his …

MAHENDRA SINGH AND 10 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 5 OTHERS

The appellants challenged orders of the Assistant Registrar, Gorakhpur, which published a tentative electoral roll of 120 members and later finalized it, directing elections for a time‑barred committee of a society. The Single Judge declined to interfere, allowing the election process to continue …

PRAMOD KUMARversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioner, a Junior Engineer with the Nagar Nigam, Shahjahanpur, was suspended by an order dated 25‑03‑2026 following the unauthorized removal and damage of four martyrs' statues by a construction agency. The petitioner claimed he was on station leave during the incident and that the agency …

MANOJ KUMARversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioner, an Assistant Engineer of Nagar Nigam Shahjahanpur, was suspended by an order dated 25‑03‑2026 following the removal and damage of four martyrs' statues by a construction agency. The petitioner claimed he was on station leave from 20‑03‑2026 to 22‑03‑2026 and that the agency acted …

D.N. POLYTECHNICversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioner, D.N. Polytechnic, filed a writ petition (Writ Tax No.3852 of 2025) challenging actions of the State of U.P. and others. The court observed that another writ petition (Writ Tax No.1046 of 2025) concerning the same grievance was already pending. Since the present petition was …

RIYAZversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court considered a bail application filed by Riyaz in Criminal Case No. 63 of 2025, alleged to involve murder under Sections 103(1), 61(2) and 238(Ka) of the BNS. The applicant argued that the FIR made a general allegation against him and co‑accused Zeeshan, that the deceased’s death was …

SMT. PRATIBHA SINGHversusPRAVEEN KUMAR

The applicant, Smt. Pratibha Singh, filed a transfer application in the Allahabad High 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 interim order previously granted, if any, …

VIKAS SHARMA @ GUGGOOversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioner, Vikas Sharma, alleged that he was illegally detained by police from 15‑03‑2023 to 30‑03‑2023 and that a false report claiming non‑functional CCTV cameras was filed to conceal the misconduct. He sought relief under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. after an RTI response indicated the cameras …

SUNILversusSTATE OF U.P.

The applicant, Sunil, filed a third bail application in a case (Crime No. 309 of 2020) involving charges of murder, attempt to murder, and rioting under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 307, 34 of the IPC and Section 7 of the Criminal Law Amendment Act. The applicant claimed innocence, arguing that the …

DEEPAK SAINIversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court of Allahabad considered a bail application filed by Deepak Saini, who was in custody for offences under Sections 420, 467, 468 and 471 IPC. The applicant argued that the trial had not concluded within 60 days of the first date fixed for taking evidence, invoking Section 437(6) of the …

SMT. NEELAM @ ANSHU AND 4 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

A complaint dated 01‑12‑2021 was filed by Naresh Kumar (the husband) against his wife Neelam @ Anshu and her family members under Sections 420, 406, 504 and 506 IPC alleging theft of jewellery and marital discord. The applicants filed a petition under Section 482 CrPC seeking to quash the summoning …

MOHD. RAIS KHANversusSATYA NARAIN GENERAL MANAGER ROADWAYS AND ANOTHER

The appellant, a retired senior clerk of the U.P. State Road Transport Corporation, sought interest on delayed gratuity payments and filed multiple petitions, culminating in a contempt application and a writ petition. The Single Judge dismissed the contempt application, directing the appellant to …

BAJAJ ALLIANZ GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTDversusSUSHMA AND 2 OTHERS

The appellant, Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Company Ltd, filed a first appeal against an order dated 2024. During the proceedings, the appellant expressed a desire to withdraw the appeal. The respondent, Sushma and two others, were represented by counsel but did not oppose the withdrawal. The …

SHARAD SAXENAversusSTATE OF U.P.

The Allahabad High Court considered a second bail application filed by Sharad Saxena, who is charged under Sections 420, 406, 506, 467, 468 and 471 of the IPC for allegedly obtaining money by promising government jobs. The earlier bail plea was dismissed ex‑parte on the ground that the applicant had …

ANURAG YADAVversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

Anurag Yadav, a 19‑year‑old, was arrested in connection with a case under Sections 65(1) and 351(3) of the BNS Act and Section 4(2) of the POCSO Act, alleging that he raped a 13‑year‑old girl. The applicant contended that the relationship was consensual, that the victim did not raise alarm, and that …

AMIT RAJBHARversusSTATE OF U.P.

The applicant, Amit Rajbhar, was arrested on 12 October 2025 in connection with a charge of rape under Section 376(2)(n) of the Indian Penal Code, arising from an alleged incident at a hotel in Varanasi. He pleaded innocence, asserting that the alleged victim, a 26‑year‑old woman, had voluntarily …

SURJAN KUMAR MAURYA AND ANR.versusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANR.

Disposed off/Decided on merits

Surjan Kumar Maurya and another filed an application under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code seeking relief against the State of U.P. The matter was listed for hearing, but the applicants failed to appear while the State’s Additional Government Advocate was present. The Court noted the …

JAGDISH PRASADversusADDL.COMMISSIONER ADMN. FAIZABAD AND OTHERS

Dismissed on merits/Rejected

Petitioner Jagdish Prasad filed a writ petition before the Allahabad High Court. The petition was previously adjourned at the petitioner's request, and the court ordered that no further adjournment would be granted and listed the matter for 10 April 2024. On the scheduled date, the petitioner failed …

ADITYA SINGHversusRUBI GULAM HAKKANI KHAN

Disposed off/Decided on merits

The petitioner, Aditya Singh, filed a petition under Article 227 of the Constitution against Rubi Gulam Hakkani Khan. The case was listed before the Allahabad High Court, Lucknow Bench, and counsel for the petitioner, Amit Singh, was recorded. However, on the hearing date, no representative appeared …

ANSHU DEVI AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. THRU. ADDL. CHIEF SECY. HOME AND OTHERS

Dismissed on merits/Rejected

The petitioners, both adults, filed a writ of mandamus seeking a court order directing the respondents not to interfere with their peaceful marital life and to provide protection. They submitted their marriage certificate and proof of age, alleging that a fourth respondent was harassing them despite …

SMT. QAMRUNNISA AND OTHERSversusSMT. TAMIZAN AND OTHERS

Dismiss other than merit(DD/Non Prosec./Abated)

The Allahabad High Court entertained multiple civil miscellaneous applications filed by the appellant Smt. Qamrunnisa and others. The court allowed the substitution applications, directing that the party list be corrected within a week. It also condoned the delay in filing the substitution …

SMT. ZARINAversusSTATE OF U.P.

The applicants filed a Section 482 Cr.P.C. application seeking to quash the chargesheet and proceedings in Criminal Case No.4916 of 2017, alleging that the FIR was vague, the allegations were false, and the prosecution was malicious. The State opposed, contending that specific allegations were made …

CHATUR BHUJ AND OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P.

The appellants were convicted by the Additional Sessions Judge, Mathura, for assaulting complainant Ram Gopal and his family members, offences punishable under Sections 308 and 323 of the Indian Penal Code, and were sentenced to six months' rigorous imprisonment. One appellant, Chaturbhuj, died …

KHARAPATTU YADAVversusSTATE OF U.P.

The appellants were convicted by the Sessions Court for offences under Sections 147, 148, 307, 149, 323, 325 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code arising from an unlawful assembly that caused injuries and attempted murder in 1993. The High Court examined the oral and documentary evidence, including …

INDRAJEETversusSTATE OF U.P.

The applicant, Indrajeet, was arrested in connection with Crime No. 174 of 2025, charged under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 190, 115(2) and 109(1) of the B.N.S. for alleged assault with a lathi‑danda, rod and pharsa. He claimed innocence, stating that no specific role was assigned to him, no …

THAKUR PRASAD AND OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P.

The appellants, convicted under IPC sections 147, 323 and 149, were sentenced to six months imprisonment but were released on probation under Section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 with a bond of Rs.10,000. They appealed under Section 374(2) of the CrPC, challenging the trial court's …

ADITYA PRAJAPATI @ GOLUversusSTATE OF U.P.

The applicant, Aditya Prajapati, sought enlargement of bail during trial for offences under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 115(2), 352, 351(3) and 109 of the B.N.S. He claimed innocence, alleging false implication and that his name was added only during investigation, with no incriminating material …

SANDEEP NAGARversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court considered a bail application filed by Sandeep Nagar, who is accused in Crime No. 507 of 2025 under Sections 109(1), 131, 352 and 351(2) of the B.N.S. The applicant claimed innocence, stating that no incriminating material was recovered and that he has no prior criminal record. The …