Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Allahabad High Court

MUKUL BANSAL AND 2 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. HOME LKO. AND ANOTHER

Decided
Disposal
DISMISSED AS NOT PRESSED

Holding

The court held that the application could not be withdrawn with liberty to re‑file as it was not pressed with such liberty.

Summary

The applicants filed an application under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code seeking permission to withdraw the pending application and to re‑file it afresh with proper pleadings and documents. The counsel for the applicants prayed for liberty to withdraw and re‑file, while the opposing side, represented by the Additional Government Advocate, did not oppose the request. The court examined whether the application could be withdrawn with the liberty to re‑file. Finding that the request was not pressed with sufficient liberty, the court declined to allow the withdrawal. Consequently, the application was rejected and the certified copy of the impugned order was to be returned to the applicants' counsel. The decision was delivered by Justice Brij Raj Singh on 5 January 2026.

Issues considered

  • Whether an application under Section 482 can be withdrawn with liberty to re‑file afresh

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • Section 482
  • withdrawal of application
  • inherent powers of High Court
  • procedural law

Judgment

                                                    HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
                                                                   LUCKNOW
                                                         APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 10757 of 2025

                                     Mukul Bansal And 2 Others
                                                                                                   .....Applicant(s)
                                                                         Versus

                                     State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And
                                     Another                                                          .....Opposite
                                                                                                            Party(s)

                                     Counsel for Applicant(s)                        :   Arvind Tripathi
                                     Counsel for Opposite Party(s)                   :   G.A.

                                    Court No. - 16
                                                            HON'BLE BRIJ RAJ SINGH, J.

                                    At the outset, learned Counsel for the applicants prays that he may be
                                    permitted to withdraw the instant application with liberty to file the same
                                    afresh with proper pleadings and documents in support thereof.

                                    The prayer sought has not been opposed by learned A.G.A..

                                    In view of the above, the instant application is rejected as not pressed with
                                    the aforesaid liberty.

                                    The certified copy of the impugned order or any other certified document
                                    filed along with the application shall be returned to the learned Counsel
                                    for the applicants by retaining a photocopy of the same on record.



                                                                                             (Brij Raj Singh,J.)
                                    January 5, 2026
                                    Mohit Singh/-




Digitally signed by :-
MOHIT SINGH
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad,
Lucknow Bench


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.