Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Allahabad High Court

NEERAJ YADAVversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

Decided

Holding

The petition was dismissed as withdrawn upon the petitioner's request and lack of objection from the respondents.

Summary

Petitioner Neeraj Yadav filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition before the Allahabad High Court. During the hearing, the petitioner’s counsel, Piyush Patel, expressed a desire to withdraw the petition. The learned Additional Government Advocate and the counsel for the third respondent, Ravi Shankar Vishwakarma, raised no objection to the withdrawal. The Court considered the petitioner's request and, finding no opposition, dismissed the writ petition as withdrawn. Consequently, the petition was closed without any substantive adjudication on the merits.

Issues considered

  • Whether a criminal miscellaneous writ petition can be withdrawn by the petitioner after filing and during the pendency of the proceedings

Subjects

  • writ petition
  • withdrawal
  • high court
  • procedural law
  • criminal miscellaneous

Judgment

                                               HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
                                               CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 17436 of 2026

                                    Neeraj Yadav
                                                                                         .....Petitioner(s)
                                                                     Versus

                                    State Of U.P. And 2 Others
                                                                                        .....Respondent(s)

                                    Counsel for Petitioner(s)       : Piyush Patel
                                    Counsel for Respondent(s)       : G.A., Ravi Shankar Vishwakarma

                                    Court No. - 47
                                                      HON'BLE RAJIV GUPTA, J.
                                                      HON'BLE DEVENDRA SINGH-I, J.

                                    1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned A.G.A. for the
                                    State, Sri R.S. Vishwakarma, learned counsel for the respondent no.3
                                    and perused the record.

                                    2. After some length of arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner
                                    has made a statement at the Bar that he does not want to press this
                                    writ petition and seeks to withdraw it.

                                    3. Learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the respondent no.3
                                    has no objection to the aforesaid prayer.

                                    4. In view of the statement made, this writ petition is dismissed as
                                    withdrawn.

                                    September 23, 2026
                                    S. Singh

                                                                  (Devendra Singh-I,J.) (Rajiv Gupta,J.)




Digitally signed by :-
SAVITA SINGH
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad


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.