Allahabad High Court
NOOR HASANversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 51 OTHERS
- Decided
Holding
The petition is dismissed as infructuous due to the efflux of time.
Summary
The petitioners filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition (No. 22029 of 2025) before the Allahabad High Court. Their counsel was not present, and no interim order had been passed. The court observed that the petition had become infructuous due to the passage of time. Consequently, the court dismissed the petition as infructuous. The judgment was delivered by Hon'ble Judges Siddharth and Vinai Kumar Dwivedi on April 23, 2026.
Issues considered
- What is the effect of delay on the maintainability of a writ petition?
Subjects
- writ petition
- infructuous
- delay
- procedural default
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 22029 of 2025
Noor Hasan
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 51 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Sunil Kumar Tiwari, Vijay Kumar
Mishra
Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 44
HON'BLE SIDDHARTH, J.
HON'BLE VINAI KUMAR DWIVEDI, J.
1. Case is called out.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners is not present.
3. There was no interim order passed in this case.
4. The petition appears to have become infructuous by efflux of time.
5. It is, accordingly, dismissed as infructuous.
(Vinai Kumar Dwivedi,J.) (Siddharth,J.)
April 23, 2026
Ruchi Agrahari
Digitally signed by :-
RUCHI AGRAHARI
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…