Allahabad High Court

KESAR SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 9 OTHERS

Decided: 5 May 2026
Bench: VINAI KUMAR DWIVEDI SIDDHARTH

Holding

The arrest, detention and remand of the petitioner were illegal and the orders were quashed, with the petitioner directed to be released forthwith.

Summary

Petitioner Kesar Singh filed a habeas corpus petition challenging his arrest on 3-4 September 2024 and a remand order dated 4 September 2024, alleging that the arrest memo lacked any valid ground and was prepared on an outdated proforma, and that the remand order showed a non‑application of mind. The petition relied on precedents such as Umang Rastogi v. State of U.P. and Sangam Lal v. State of U.P. The High Court examined the documents and found that the arrest, detention and remand were not supported by lawful grounds and violated procedural requirements. Consequently, the Court quashed the arrest memo and the remand order issued under sections 329, 308, 303 and 304 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sahnita, 2023, and directed the immediate release of the petitioner. The writ petition was allowed, though the Court left open the possibility for the respondents to initiate fresh proceedings in accordance with law.

Issues considered

What is the legality of the arrest memo and remand order issued against the petitioner?
Whether the detention under sections 329, 308, 303 and 304 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sahnita, 2023, was lawful?
Whether the High Court can quash the arrest and remand orders on the ground of procedural defect and lack of valid grounds?

Legislation cited

Bhartiya Nyaya Sahnita (B.N.S), 2023 — s. 303, 304, 308, 329

Subjects

habeas corpus
illegal detention
arrest memo
remand order
procedural defect
B.N.S. sections 329 308 303 304
contempt proceedings
magisterial enquiry

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
HABEAS CORPUS WRIT PETITION No. - 457 of 2026

Kesar Singh
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus

State Of U.P. And 9 Others
.....Respondent(s)

Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Brijesh Kumar Tiwari, Sharad Chand
Rai
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) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the
arrest memo dated 04.09.2024 and remand order dated 04.09.2024 passed by
the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 16, Allahabad.

(ii). Issue any other writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus
declare illegal arresting, illegal detention and illegal custody of the petitioner
dated 03.09.2024 and 04.09.2024 by the respondent no. 9 and 10, and 16-
days illegal detention and illegal custody is wholly illegal null and void and
take a strict action against the respondents 9 and 10.

(iii) Issue any other writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus
initiate the contempt proceeding against the respondent no. 8, 9 and 10
according to the Hon'ble Supreme Court case of Vihaan Kumar vs.
Haryana, decided on 07.02.2025, case of D.K. Basu v. State of West
Bengal (1997) and case of Mihir Rajkesh Shah Vs. State of Maharashtra
(2025) and case of Pankaj Bansal Vs. Union of India (2024).

(iv) Issue any other writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus to
initiate the departmental enquiry and magisterial enquiry upon the action
of errant police officers and other persons/respondents."

2. Heard Learned counsel for the petitioner and learned AGA for the State
respondents and perused the writ petition and the annexures therewith.
HABC No. 457 of 2026
2

3. 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 04.09.2024 has been passed on a printed 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 04.09.2024
passed by the learned Remand Magistrate, District Prayagraj in Case Crime
No. 151 of 2024 u/s 329, 308, 303, 304 of Bhartiya Nyaya Sahnita (B.N.S),
2023, P.S. Airport, District Prayagraj, 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.

(Vinai Kumar Dwivedi,J.) (Siddharth,J.)
May 6, 2026
Shubham

Digitally signed by :-
SHUBHAM KUMAR AGRAHARI
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…