Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Allahabad High Court

ARUNversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

Decided

Holding

The petition is dismissed as infructuous because the petitioner is already in custody.

Summary

Petitioner Arun filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition challenging his detention. During the hearing, counsel informed the court that the petitioner had already been arrested and placed in jail, rendering the petition moot. The State's Additional Government Advocate and the private respondent concurred with this factual situation. The court examined whether the petition could proceed despite the petitioner’s incarceration. Finding that the relief sought was no longer applicable, the court held the petition to be infructuous and dismissed it. No substantive merits of the petition were addressed.

Issues considered

  • Whether a writ petition becomes infructuous when the petitioner is already arrested and detained.

Subjects

  • writ petition
  • criminal procedure
  • infructuous
  • arrest
  • detention
  • jurisdiction

Judgment

                                                   HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
                                                   CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 19542 of 2026

                                    Arun
                                                                                                    .....Petitioner(s)
                                                                           Versus

                                    State Of U.P. And 3 Others
                                                                                                  .....Respondent(s)

                                    Counsel for Petitioner(s)         : Brijesh Kumar Pandey, Vachaspati
                                                                        Panday
                                    Counsel for Respondent(s)         : G.A., Santosh Kumar Singh, Vishal
                                                                        Kumar Sonkar

                                    Court No. - 48
                                                       HON'BLE CHANDRA DHARI SINGH, J.
                                                       HON'BLE TARUN SAXENA, J.

                                    1. Heard Mr. Vachaspati Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr.
                                    Rizwan Ahmad, learned AGA for the State respondents and Mr. Santosh
                                    Kumar Singh, learned counsel appearing for the respondent no.4.

                                    2. At the very outset, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted
                                    and apprised the Court that the sole petitioner has been arrested and sent to
                                    jail, therefore, the instant writ petition has been rendered infructuous.

                                    3. Learned AGA as well as learned counsel for the private respondent have
                                    no objection to the aforesaid facts.

                                    4. Accordingly, the instant writ petition is dismissed as infructuous.



                                                                  (Tarun Saxena,J.) (Chandra Dhari Singh,J.)
                                    September 9, 2026
                                    Prajapati RK




Digitally signed by :-
RAMKESH PRAJAPATI
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.