Allahabad High Court
JASVEER KUMARversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
Holding
The arrest, detention, and remand order were illegal and are hereby quashed, with the petitioner ordered to be released forthwith.
Summary
Jasveer Kumar filed a habeas corpus petition challenging his arrest and subsequent remand under sections of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sahnita, the Information Technology (Amendment) Act, 2008 and the Aadhaar Act, 2016. The petitioner contended that the arrest memo lacked a proper ground and was based on an outdated proforma, indicating a failure to apply judicial mind. The court noted that the remand order was similarly issued on a printed proforma and referenced prior judgments (Umang Rastogi v. State of U.P. and Sangam Lal v. State of U.P.) emphasizing the need for proper procedural compliance. The learned judges held that the arrest, detention, and remand were illegal, quashed the remand order, and directed the immediate release of the petitioner. The writ petition was allowed, though the respondents were permitted to initiate fresh proceedings if warranted.
Issues considered
- What is the legality of the petitioner’s arrest and remand under the cited statutes?
- Did the arrest memo and remand order comply with procedural requirements, including proper grounding and application of mind?
- Should the writ of habeas corpus be granted to secure the petitioner’s release?
Legislation cited
- Aadhaar Card (Targeted Delivery of Financial and other Subsidies, Benefits and Services) Act, 2016 — s. 36, 42
- Bhartiya Nyaya Sahnita (B.N.S), 2023 — s. 318(4), 319(2), 335, 337, 338
- Information Technology (Amendment) Act, 2008 — s. 65, 66
Subjects
- habeas corpus
- illegal detention
- arrest memo
- remand order
- procedural lapse
- quash
- release
- criminal procedure
- IT Act
- Aadhaar Act
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
HABEAS CORPUS WRIT PETITION No. - 456 of 2026
Jasveer Kumar
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Dileep Kumar Shukla, Mohit Singh, Ravi
Kumar Singh
Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 44
HON'BLE SIDDHARTH, J.
HON'BLE VINAI KUMAR DWIVEDI, J.
1. This petition has been filed praying for following reliefs:
"i. To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Habeas
Corpus directing the respondents herein to produce the
corpus/petitioner while declaring the detention, arrest and
subsequent remand and custody of the petitioner as
unconstitutional, illegal and arbitrary and consequently
directing the respondents to release the petitioner forthwith in
respect of case crime no. 0130 of 2026 u/s 319(2), 318(4), 335,
337, 338 Bhartiya Nyaya Sahnita (B.N.S), 2023, Sections 65
and 66 Information Technology (Amendment), Act, 2008 and
sections 36 and 42 Aadhar Card (Targeted Delivery of
Financial and other Subsidies, Benefits and Services) Act, 2016
P.S. Bahjoi, District Sambhal.
ii. To issue an appropriate writ, order or direction, quashing
and setting aside, the Remand Order dated 22.03.2026 passed
by the learned Remand Magistrate, District Sambhal in case
crime no. 0130 of 2026 u/s 319(2), 318(4), 335, 337, 338
Bhartiya Nyaya Sahnita (B.N.S), 2023, Sections 65 and 66
Information Technology (Amendment), Act, 2008 and sections
36 and 42 Aadhar Card (Targeted Delivery of Financial and
other Subsidies, Benefits and Services) Act, 2016 P.S. Bahjoi,
District Sambhal."
2. Heard Sri Mohit Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
AGA for the State respondents and perused the writ petition and the
annexures therewith.
3. Sri Mohit Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner points out that no good
ground of arrest has been mentioned in the arrest memo of the petitioner.
Even otherwise, the old proforma has been used by the Investing Officer.
Further the remand order dated 22.03.2026 has been passed on a printed
HABC No. 456 of 2026
2
proforma, which shows non-application of mind in view of the judgment of
this Court in the case of Umang Rastogi and another Vs. State of U.P. and
others passed in Habeas Corpus Writ Petition No. 35 of 2026 and
judgment of Lucknow Bench of this Court in Application under Section
482 No. 3963 of 2022 Sangam Lal Vs. State of U.P. and Others.
4. Learned AGA has opposed the submission but could not dispute the
aforesaid fact.
5. In view of the above, the impugned order of arrest, detention and remand
of the petitioner are held to be illegal. The remand order dated 22.03.2026
passed by the learned Remand Magistrate, District Sambhal in Case Crime
No. 0130 of 2026 u/s 319(2), 318(4), 335, 337, 338 Bhartiya Nyaya Sahnita
(B.N.S), 2023, Sections 65 and 66 Information Technology (Amendment),
Act, 2008 and sections 36 and 42 Aadhar Card (Targeted Delivery of
Financial and other Subsidies, Benefits and Services) Act, 2016 P.S. Bahjoi,
District Sambhal is hereby quashed. The arrest and detention of the
petitioner is held to be illegal. He is directed to be released forthwith without
waiting for supply of certified copy of this order.
6. The writ petition is allowed.
7. However, it is open for the respondents to proceed against the petitioner
afresh in accordance with law.
April 23, 2026
NSC
(Vinai Kumar Dwivedi,J.) (Siddharth,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
NARENDRA SINGH CHAUDHARY
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…