Created by Fuzzy Cloud

SIDDHARTH

414 judgments · newest first · showing 1–200

RAJJU AND OTHERSversusSTATE

The appellants Raffu and Kallu were convicted for the murder of Yamin under Section 302 IPC read with Section 34 IPC. The prosecution alleged that both participated in a quarrel that led to Raffu shooting Yamin, with Kallu allegedly assisting. The High Court examined the evidence and found that …

CHANDRAPAL AND OTHERSversusSTATE

The appeal arose from a murder arising out of a dispute over diversion of canal water. The complainant Balak Ram alleged that Chandrapal fired a country‑made pistol at his son Jai Veer, causing fatal injuries, and that the other accused aided the act. The trial court convicted Chandrapal under IPC …

SMT. SHASHIKALA CHAUHANversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The appellant, Smt. Shashikala Chauhan, alleged that Ajay Yadav repeatedly raped and blackmailed her, threatening to release a video. The trial court acquitted Yadav, finding contradictions in the appellant's statements and no corroborative evidence. On appeal, the appellant argued that the trial …

SMT. MUNNI DEVIversusSTATE OF U.P.

Munni Devi applied for anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the CrPC in a case involving offences under Sections 420, 467, 468 and 471 IPC. Her earlier anticipatory bail application had been rejected, with a direction to appear before the trial court and seek regular bail, which she failed to do. …

TAUQEERversusSTATE OF U.P.

The Allahabad High Court considered the third bail application of Tauqeer, accused in Crime No. 164 of 2023 under IPC sections 452, 302, 120‑B/34. The applicant argued that the sole witness PW‑1 did not support the allegations, that he was falsely implicated, has no prior record and has been in …

USMAN AND AND 2 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The applicants Usman, Farhan (Monu) and Nauman sought anticipatory bail under Section 438 CrPC in a case involving IPC offences of dacoity, hurt, assault, criminal intimidation, attempt to murder and conspiracy. Usman, who has two prior criminal cases, was denied anticipatory bail, with the court …

HITESH @ HITESH KUMAR AND 6 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

Disposed off/Decided on merits

Petitioners Hitesh Kumar and six others filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking quash of an FIR dated 29‑08‑2025 (Crime No. 50 of 2025) alleging offences under sections 85, 115(2), 352, 351(3), 64 and 82 of the Indian Penal Code, the Dowry Prohibition Act and other statutes, and also …

SACHIN KUMAR AND 4 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioners filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from arrest. The State, represented by the Additional Government Advocate, indicated that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of it. The High Court noted the …

SATYABHAN YADAV @ GOLUversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioner, Satyabhan Yadav, filed a habeas corpus petition challenging his arrest and remand after FIR No. 1478/2025 was lodged on 24‑12‑2025. A notice under Section 35(3) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sahnita (BNSS) was issued, but the petitioner was arrested on 25‑12‑2025 before the notice period …

DIVYA YADAVversusTHE STATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

Divya Yadav, a 26‑year‑old adult, filed a habeas corpus petition claiming she was being detained against her will and fearing for her life due to her influential father. She asserted that she had married Abhishek Yadav and wished to live with him, but was being kept under the control of her parents. …

SURESH DIXIT AND 11 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

A criminal miscellaneous writ petition (No. 20613 of 2025) was filed by Suresh Dixit and eleven others against the State of U.P. and three others. The petitioners sought relief, and mediation between the parties was attempted but failed. No counsel appeared on behalf of either the petitioners or the …

SHANKAR LAL AND 2 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioners filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from arrest. The State's Advocate informed the court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of the police report. The High Court noted the existence of an interim …

SMT. ROSHANI AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U P AND 3 OTHERS

Petitioners Smt. Roshani and another filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking protection from arrest. The State informed the court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of the police report. The High Court, noting the existence …

FIRASAT SHAH AND 4 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

Petitioners Firasat Shah and four others filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking protection from arrest. The State of U.P. submitted that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of the police report. The High Court noted the …

SHAH ALAM AND 3 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioners filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from arrest. The State's Advocate informed the court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of the police report. The High Court noted the existence of an interim …

MOHD. HAMID AND 2 OTHERSversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND 3 OTHERS

Petitioners Mohd. Hamid and two others filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from arrest. The State, represented by the Additional Advocate General, informed the court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of it. The …

JABAR SINGH AND 2 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U P AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioners, Jabar Singh and two others, filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from arrest. The State, represented by the Attorney General, indicated that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of it. The High Court …

MANISHA @ RITAversusSTATE OF UP AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioner, Manisha @ Rita, filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from arrest. The State, represented by the Additional Government Advocate, informed the court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of the police …

JOGENDRA PRASAD AND 2 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioners filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief against potential arrest. The State had filed a charge sheet, but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of the police report. The High Court noted the existence of an interim order in the writ petition …

MAHESH CHANDRAversusSTATE OF U P AND 2 OTHERS

Mahesh Chandra filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition challenging his potential arrest. The State of U.P. and two others had filed a charge sheet, but the court was uncertain whether cognizance of the charge sheet had been taken by the trial court. The petitioners sought relief to prevent …

SURENDRA KUMARversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioner filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from arrest. The State's Additional Government Advocate informed the court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of it. The High Court noted the existence of an …

VIKAS SHARMA AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

In Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 9471 of 2022, the petitioners Vikas Sharma and another sought relief to prevent their arrest. The State, represented by the Additional Government Advocate, informed the court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken …

NANHE BABU ALIAS MUSTKEEMversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

Nanhe Babu filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking protection from arrest. The State's Additional Government Advocate informed the court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of the police report. The High Court noted that an …

ROHITASversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioner Rohitas filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition challenging the possibility of his arrest. The State informed the court that a charge sheet had been filed, but it was unclear whether the court had taken cognizance of it. The High Court noted the existence of an interim order in …

SMT. ARTI @ SHIVANI AND 5 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U P AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioners, Smt. Arti @ Shivani and five others, filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from arrest. The State, represented by the Additional Government Advocate, indicated that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of …

ANURAG CHAUDHARYversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioner, Anurag Chaudhary, filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from potential arrest. The State informed the court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of the police report. The High Court, noting the …

DEVYENDU RAI @ DEVYENDU RAMversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioner, Devyendu Rai, filed Criminal Miscellaneous Writ Petition No. 9364 of 2022 before the High Court of Allahabad seeking relief against the State of U.P. and three others. The petitioner’s counsel, Prem Narayan Rai, was not present before the bench. The court observed that no interim …

GAYATRI DEVI AND 5 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U P AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioners, Gayatri Devi and five others, filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from potential arrest. The State, represented by the Additional Government Advocate, informed the Court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken …

SABIR ALI (MINOR)versusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioner, a minor named Sabir Ali, filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from arrest. The State, represented by the Additional Government Advocate, indicated that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of it. The High …

UMESH AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioners, Umesh and another, filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from arrest. The State, represented by the Additional Government Advocate, informed the court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of the …

RADHACHARAN AND 4 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

Petitioners Radhacharan and four others filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from arrest. The State, represented by the Additional Government Advocate, informed the court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of it. …

SANJAY TYAGIversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

Petitioner Sanjay Tyagi filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition challenging his potential arrest. The State of U.P. submitted a charge sheet, but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of the police report. The High Court noted the uncertainty and, considering the interim …

FIROZ KHANversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

Firoz Khan filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition challenging his potential arrest. The State of U.P. submitted a charge sheet, but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of the police report. The High Court noted the existence of an interim order in the writ petition and …

MUNESH SHARMAversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

Munesh Sharma filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition before the Allahabad High Court. The petitioner’s counsel, Siddarth Jaiswal, was not present, and no interim relief had been ordered. The court observed that the petition had become infructuous due to the lapse of time. Consequently, the …

MOHAMMAD ZAMEER ALIAS BABU MEDIAversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 4 OTHERS

The petitioner, Mohammad Zameer alias Babu Media, filed Criminal Miscellaneous Writ Petition No. 9360 of 2023 before the Allahabad High Court. The petitioner’s counsel, Bipin Kumar Tripathi, was not present at the hearing. No interim order had been passed in the proceedings. The Court observed that …

FURKAN AND 13 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioners, Furkan and 13 others, filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from arrest. The State, represented by the Additional Government Advocate, informed the court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of it. …

MOHD. FAHIMversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioner, Mohd. Fahim, filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from arrest. The State, represented by the Attorney General, informed the court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of the police report. The High …

GAYYOOR AHMAD AND 5 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AN 2 OTHERS

The petitioners filed Criminal Miscellaneous Writ Petition No. 9379 of 2023 before the Allahabad High Court seeking relief against the State of U.P. and two other respondents. The petitioners’ counsel, Rahul Mishra and Sanjay Kumar Pandey, were not present when the matter was listed. No interim …

ANCHAL PATWA AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

Petitioners Anchal Patwa and another filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from arrest. The State had filed a charge sheet, but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of the police report. The learned Additional Government Advocate confirmed the filing of …

BIHARI LAL SHARMAversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

Bihari Lal Sharma filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition challenging his potential arrest. The State of Uttar Pradesh submitted that a charge sheet had been filed, but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of it. The High Court noted the existence of an interim order in …

MEETA YADAV AND 3 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

Petitioners Meeta Yadav and three others filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from arrest. The State, represented by the Additional Advocate General, informed the Court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of it. …

GAURAV KUMAR JAIN AND 7 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

Petitioners filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from potential arrest. The State's Advocate informed the court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of it. The High Court noted the existence of an interim order in …

BANSHI DAS AND 2 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

Petitioners Banshi Das and two others filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from arrest. The State, represented by the Additional Government Advocate, informed the Court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of the …

BANSHI BRIJMOHAN DAS AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

Petitioners Banshi Brijmohan Das and another filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief against arrest. The State, represented by the Additional Government Advocate, informed the court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance …

RIHAN AND 5 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioners filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from arrest. The State informed the court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of the police report. The High Court noted the existence of an interim order in the …

PRADEEP GANGWAR @ SHAILENDRAversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

Petitioner Pradeep Gangwar filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking protection from arrest. The State of U.P. submitted a charge sheet, but the court was uncertain whether cognizance of the police report had been taken. The learned Attorney General informed the bench of the charge sheet …

ABDUL SATTAR AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

Petitioners Abdul Sattar and another filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking protection from arrest. The State of Uttar Pradesh and two others, as respondents, informed the court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of the …

MUSHAHID AND 5 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

Mushahid and five others filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition challenging their potential arrest. The State, represented by the Additional Government Advocate, informed the court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of the police …

BINNIversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioner Binni filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition challenging the prospect of arrest after a charge sheet was filed by the investigating officer. The State, represented by the Advocate General, indicated that while the charge sheet had been submitted, it was unclear whether the trial …

SMT.RUKSANA AND 3 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

Petitioners Smt. Ruksana and three others filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from arrest. The State, represented by the Additional Government Advocate, informed the court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of …

SONU SHARMAversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

Petitioner Sonu Sharma filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition challenging the prospect of his arrest. The State, represented by the Additional Government Advocate, informed the court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of it. The …

SHADABversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioners, represented by counsel Dharmendra Kumar and Ganga Bhushan Mishra, filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from arrest. The State, represented by G.A., informed the Court that a charge sheet had already been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had …

KAMIL AHMAD AND 5 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioners, Kamil Ahmad and five others, filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from potential arrest. The State, represented by the Additional Government Advocate, informed the Court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken …

RAUF PAHALWAN AND 4 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

Petitioners Rauf Pahalwan and four others filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from arrest. The State, represented by the Attorney General, informed the court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of it. The High …

RAJENDRA PRASAD UPADHYAYversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioner filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from arrest. The State, represented by the Attorney General, informed the court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of the police report. The High Court noted the …

RAJENDRA PRASAD UPADHYAYversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 4 OTHERS

Petitioner Rajendra Prasad Upadhyay filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition challenging the prospect of his arrest. The State of U.P. submitted that a charge sheet had already been filed, but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of it. The High Court noted the existence …

PRAVEEN KUMAR JAIN AND 2 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U P AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioners filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from arrest. The State's counsel informed the court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of it. The High Court noted the existence of an interim order in the writ …

ANGAD NISHADversusState of U.P.

Allowed/Partly Allowed on merits

The applicant, Angad Nishad, sought bail in a criminal case (Crime No. 172 of 2023) involving charges under Sections 498-A, 304-B, 201 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, alleging dowry harassment and dowry death. The applicant argued that he had been in …

CHANDRAKESH AND 3 OTHERSversusState of U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

Petitioners Chandrakesh and three others filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from arrest. The State of U.P. submitted that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of the police report. The High Court noted the uncertainty …

HARISHversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioner, Harish, filed Criminal Miscellaneous Writ Petition No. 8634 of 2025 before the Allahabad High Court seeking relief against the State of Uttar Pradesh and two others. The petitioner’s counsel, Gaurav Tripathi, was not present at the hearing. No interim order had been passed in the …

ISTEKHAR AHMADversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioner filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from arrest. The State informed the court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of the police report. The High Court noted the existence of an interim order in the …

RAMA SHANKAR CHAUDHARYversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

Rama Shankar Chaudhary filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking protection from arrest. The State had filed a charge sheet, but the court was uncertain whether cognizance of the charge sheet had been taken. The petitioners' counsel did not appear, while the State's counsel indicated the …

AASAMAversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

A writ petition (Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 165 of 2023) was filed by Aasama seeking relief against potential arrest. The State of U.P. and three others responded that a charge sheet had been filed, but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of the police report. The …

RAGHUVER AND OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P.

The Court heard Criminal Appeal No. 2399 of 1983 filed by Raghuver and others against the State of Uttar Pradesh. The record of the appeal is not detailed in the excerpt. The Court appointed an amicus curiae, Sri Ajay Kumar Pandey, to assist. The judgment orders that the amicus curiae be paid a …

AMARNATH SAHU AND 10 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioners, Amarnath Sahu and ten others, filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition (No. 784 of 2023) against the State of Uttar Pradesh and three other respondents. The petitioners' counsel was absent, and no interim relief had been ordered. The Court observed that the petition had become …

MOHD.KAMIL AND 10 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioners, Mohd. Kamil and ten others, filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from potential arrest. The State, represented by the Additional Government Advocate, indicated that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance …

BADELALversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 4 OTHERS

The petitioner, Badelal, filed Criminal Miscellaneous Writ Petition No. 778 of 2025 before the Allahabad High Court seeking relief against the State of Uttar Pradesh and four others. The petitioner's counsel was not present at the hearing. No interim order had been passed in the proceedings. The …

SIYARAM AND 3 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioners filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from arrest after a charge sheet had been filed by the investigating officer. The State’s Advocate indicated that while the charge sheet was submitted, it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of it. The …

SANGEETA @ SANGEETA KASHYAP AND 3 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioners filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from arrest after a charge sheet had been filed by the investigating officer. The State’s Additional Government Advocate indicated that while the charge sheet was submitted, it was unclear whether the trial court had taken …

RAJJANversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioner, Rajjan, filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from arrest after a charge sheet was filed against him. The State of U.P. and three others submitted the charge sheet, but the court was uncertain whether cognizance of the police report had been taken. The learned …

VIRENDRA SINGH AND 6 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioners sought relief in a criminal miscellaneous writ petition, but mediation between the parties had failed. No counsel appeared on behalf of either the petitioners or the respondents to argue the petition. The court noted the absence of representation for both sides. Consequently, the …

HARISH CHANDRPAL AND 3 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

Petitioners Harish Chandrpal and others filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from arrest. The State informed the court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of the police report. The High Court noted the existence of …

LALIT RAJPOOT AND 4 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

In Criminal Miscellaneous Writ Petition No. 7779 of 2022, Lalit Rajpoot and four others filed a petition against the State of Uttar Pradesh and two others. The petitioner's counsel, Ajay Dubey, was not present before the bench. No interim relief had been granted in the proceedings. The Court …

PRADEEP PALversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

Petitioner Pradeep Pal filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief against the State of Uttar Pradesh and two others. The petitioners alleged that they might be arrested despite a charge sheet having been filed, but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of the …

KAILASH YADAV ALIAS CHHOTUversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

Kailash Yadav alias Chhotu filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition before the Allahabad High Court seeking relief against the State of U.P. and three others. The court observed that attempts at mediation between the parties had been unsuccessful. No counsel appeared on behalf of either the …

WASEEM ALIversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 5 OTHERS

Waseem Ali filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition (No. 7735 of 2023) challenging his potential arrest in a case where a charge sheet had been filed by the investigating officer. The State, represented by the Additional Government Advocate, indicated that while the charge sheet was submitted, …

SRI MAYANK SRIVASTAVA AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioners filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition (No. 7598 of 2023) before the Allahabad High Court. The petitioners' counsel was not present, and no interim order had been passed. The court observed that the petition had become infructuous due to the lapse of time. Consequently, the …

AHMAD ALI AND 2 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioners filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from arrest. The State informed the court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of the police report. The High Court noted the existence of an interim order in the …

KULDEEP RATHAUR AND 5 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

Petitioners filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief against arrest. The State informed the court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of the police report. The High Court noted the existence of an interim order in the …

NEERAJ JAIN AND 2 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

In Criminal Miscellaneous Writ Petition No. 7841 of 2022, petitioners Neeraj Jain and two others filed a petition against the State of Uttar Pradesh and two others. The petitioner's counsel, Sunil Kumar Yadav, was absent, and no interim relief had been ordered. The court observed that the petition …

SANCHIT RASTOGI AND 6 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

Petitioners Sanchit Rastogi and six others filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from arrest. No counsel appeared for the petitioners. The State counsel informed the court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of the …

UTTEJ KUMAR @ RITESH KUMARversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

A criminal miscellaneous writ petition (No. 7521 of 2023) was filed by Uttej Kumar @ Ritesh Kumar against the State of Uttar Pradesh and three others. The petitioner's counsel was absent and no interim relief had been sought or granted. The court observed that the petition had become infructuous due …

RAM BACHAN KUSHWAHA AND 2 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U P AND 3 OTHERS

Petitioners Ram Bachan Kushwaha and two others filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from arrest. The State, represented by the Additional Government Advocate, informed the court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance …

HEMANT KUMARI AND 5 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioners, Hemant Kumari and five others, filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking protection from arrest. The State had filed a charge sheet, but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of the police report. An interim order was already in operation in the writ …

SMT. SHREYA KHANDELWAL AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioners, Smt. Shreya Khandelwal and another, filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from arrest. The State, represented by the Attorney General, informed the court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of the …

PRAVEEN TYAGI @ PRAVEEN KUMARversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

Petitioner Praveen Tyagi filed Criminal Miscellaneous Writ Petition No. 7763 of 2023 against the State of U.P. and three others. The petitioner’s counsel, Sunil Kumar Dubey, was not present before the Court. No interim relief had been sought or granted. The Court observed that the petition had …

SMT PREETY DEVIversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

Smt. Preety Devi filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from arrest. The State counsel informed the court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of the police report. The High Court, noting the existence of an interim …

NAMAN KATIYAR AND 2 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioners, Naman Katiyar and two others, filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition against the State of U.P. and two others seeking relief. The court observed that mediation between the parties had failed. Additionally, no counsel appeared on behalf of either the petitioners or the …

SURESHversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioner filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from arrest. The State informed the court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of it. The High Court noted the existence of an interim order in the writ petition …

MANGU LAL VERMA AND 8 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioners filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition (No. 7867 of 2023) before the Allahabad High Court. The petitioner’s counsel was absent, and no interim order had been passed. The Court observed that the petition had become infructuous due to the lapse of time. Consequently, the petition …

TANWEER SIDDIQUI @ TANWEER AHMAD SIDDIQUIversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioners, Tanweer Siddiqui and Tanweer Ahmad Siddiqui, filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition before the Allahabad High Court. The petition sought relief, but mediation between the parties had failed. No counsel appeared on behalf of either the petitioners or the respondents to argue …

PRAKASH CHANDRAversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioner, Prakash Chandra, filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from arrest. The State, represented by the Additional Government Advocate, informed the Court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of the police …

SRI PAL SINGH AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioners, Sri Pal Singh and another, filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking protection from arrest. The State had filed a charge sheet, but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of the police report. The High Court, noting the existence of an interim order …

CHANDRAMANI AND 4 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

Petitioners Chandramani and four others filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from potential arrest. The State, represented by the Additional Government Advocate, informed the Court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken …

KESHAV KANT YADAVversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioner, Keshav Kant Yadav, filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from arrest. The State, represented by the Additional Government Advocate, informed the court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of the …

SAKIR AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

Petitioners Sakir and another filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from arrest. The State's Advocate informed the court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of the police report. The High Court, noting the existence …

AASHISH CHAUDHARYversusTHE STATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioner, Aashish Chaudhary, filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief. The Court had earlier issued an interim order directing the petitioner to deposit a specified amount to explore settlement through the Mediation and Conciliation Centre. The petitioner failed to comply …

CHANDRA BHUSAN MISHRAversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

Petitioner Chandra Bhusan Mishra filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from arrest. The State's Advocate informed the court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of the police report. The High Court, noting the …

NEERAJ @ BUNTY AND 5 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioners filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from arrest. The State's counsel indicated that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of the police report. The High Court, noting the existence of an interim order in …

RAKESH SRIVASTAVAversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioner, Rakesh Srivastava, filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from arrest. The State, represented by the Additional Government Advocate, indicated that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of it. The High Court …

TARANJEET SINGH AND 5 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

Petitioners Taranjeet Singh and five others filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking protection from arrest. The State counsel informed the court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of the police report. The High Court, …

KAMLESH SINGH AND 4 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioners filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking protection from arrest. The State's Advocate informed the court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of the police report. The High Court, noting the existence of an …

KALYAN SINGH AND 8 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 18 OTHERS

Petitioners Kalyan Singh and eight others filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition challenging their potential arrest. No respondent appeared, and the Attorney General for the State informed the court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken …

GOVIND @ GOPAL AND 5 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioners filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief, but mediation between the parties failed. No counsel appeared on behalf of either the petitioners or the respondents to argue the petition. The court noted the absence of representation and the failure of mediation. …

MAHESH KUMAR YADAV ALIAS MAHESHversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

Mahesh Kumar Yadav filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from arrest. The State of Uttar Pradesh and two others were respondents. The petitioners' counsel were absent, while the State's counsel indicated that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial …

SMT. RUKMANI AND 4 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

Smt. Rukmani and four others filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition before the Allahabad High Court seeking relief against the State of U.P. and two others. The Court had earlier issued an interim order directing the petitioners to deposit a specified amount to enable settlement negotiations …

SUDHEER KUMAR PANDEY AND 3 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioners, Sudheer Kumar Pandey and three others, filed Criminal Miscellaneous Writ Petition No. 7869 of 2023 before the Allahabad High Court challenging actions of the State of Uttar Pradesh and two other respondents. The petitioner's counsel, Vivek Kumar Mishra, was absent at the hearing. No …

VARSHA DEVI AND 4 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

Varsha Devi and four others filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition (No. 7858 of 2023) before the Allahabad High Court seeking relief against the State of Uttar Pradesh and two other respondents. The petitioner's counsel, Santosh Kumar Shukla, was absent, and no interim orders had been passed. …

SMT. NAVITA SRIVASTAVAversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

Smt. Navita Srivastava filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition challenging the possibility of her arrest. The State of Uttar Pradesh submitted that a charge sheet had already been filed, but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of it. The High Court noted the uncertainty …

SAJIVAN VISHWAKARMA AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioners, Sajivan Vishwakarma and another, filed Criminal Miscellaneous Writ Petition No. 7892 of 2023 before the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad. The petitioner's counsel, Sheetala Prasad Pandey, was not present during the hearing. No interim order had been passed in the matter. The …

TEJ PAL SINGH AND 4 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

Petitioners Tej Pal Singh and others filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief against prospective arrest. The State had filed a charge sheet, but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of the police report. The High Court noted the existence of an interim …

DHEERAJ @ BILLUversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioners, Dheeraj @ Billu, filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition before the Allahabad High Court against the State of U.P. and three others seeking relief. The petitioner's counsel, Agnivesh and Pradyumn Kumar, were not present before the court. No interim order had been passed in the …

RAM BABU AND 10 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

Ram Babu and ten others filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief against arrest. The State's Advocate informed the court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of it. The Allahabad High Court, noting the uncertainty about …

SHAIMUN NISHAversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

Shaimun Nisha filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from arrest. The State had filed a charge sheet, but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of the police report. The High Court noted the existence of an interim order in the writ petition and, to prevent …

RACHIT JAIN AND 6 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

Petitioners Rachit Jain and six others filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from arrest. No counsel appeared for the petitioners. The State informed the court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of the police …

ANIRUDDH YADAV @ SUNIL YADAVversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

Aniruddh Yadav filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking protection from arrest. The State informed the court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance. The High Court noted the existence of an interim order in the writ petition and …

ANIRUDDH YADAV @ SUNIL YADAVversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

Aniruddh Yadav filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking protection from arrest. The State of U.P. submitted a charge sheet, but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of the police report. The High Court noted the existence of an interim order in the petition and …

RITESH @ RAKESHversusSTATE OF UP AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioner, Ritesh @ Rakesh, filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition challenging the prospect of his arrest. The State informed the court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of the police report. The High Court, noting the …

MANISH SINGH AND 3 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

Manish Singh and three others filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition before the Allahabad High Court seeking relief against the State of U.P. and two others. The petitioners attempted mediation, which ultimately failed. No counsel appeared on behalf of either the petitioners or the respondents …

SMT. POOJAversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND 3 OTHERS

Smt. Pooja filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking protection from arrest. The State of Uttar Pradesh and three others submitted that a charge sheet had already been filed, but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of the police report. The High Court noted the …

HAKIM SINGH AND 5 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioners, Hakim Singh and five others, filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from arrest. The State, represented by the Attorney General, informed the court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of it. The High …

RAUMAN SUHAIL SAIFI ALIAS PASHA AND 9 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioners, Rauman Suhail Saifi and nine others, filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from arrest. The State, represented by the Attorney General, informed the court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of the …

SAVENDRA @ SARVENDRAversusSTATE OF UP AND 2 OTHERS

Petitioner Savendra filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from arrest. The State, represented by the Additional Government Advocate, informed the Court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of the police report. The …

RAHUL PANDEYversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioner, Rahul Pandey, filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from arrest. The State, represented by the Attorney General, informed the court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of the police report. The High …

DEV NATH RAJBHARversusSTATE OF U,P. AND 2 OTHERS

Petitioner Dev Nath Rajbhar filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition challenging his potential arrest. The State submitted a charge sheet, but the court was uncertain whether cognizance of the charge sheet had been taken by the trial court. The High Court, noting the existence of an interim …

SHAHANA AND 7 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

Shahana and seven others filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief against their arrest. No counsel appeared for the petitioners. The State informed the court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of the police report. …

BYASMUNI AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

Petitioners Byasmuni and another filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking protection from arrest. The State informed the court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of the police report. The High Court noted the uncertainty …

KM. ANKITA KANNAUJIA AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

Petitioners Ankita Kannaujia and another filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from arrest. The State counsel informed the court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of the police report. The High Court noted the …

SANTOSH ALIAS SUNIL AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

Petitioners Santosh alias Sunil and another filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking protection from arrest. The State counsel informed the court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of the police report. The High Court, …

SAMBHASKAR SINGH AND 3 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

Petitioners Sambhaskar Singh and three others filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition before the Allahabad High Court seeking relief against the State of U.P. and three others. The petition hinged on the failure of mediation between the parties. No counsel appeared on behalf of either side to …

MOHD DANISH AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. & 3 OTHERS

The petitioners, Mohd Danish and another, filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from arrest. The State, represented by the Advocate General, informed the court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of it. The High …

GHANSHYAM DAS SHARMA AND 4 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioners, Ghanshyam Das Sharma and four others, filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition before the Allahabad High Court. The court noted that mediation between the parties had failed. No counsel appeared on behalf of either side to argue the petition. Consequently, the court found no …

NAUSHADversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioner filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from arrest. No counsel appeared for the petitioner, while the State's counsel informed that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of it. The High Court noted the …

JAMUNA PRASAD AND 2 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

Jamuna Prasad and two others filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from arrest. The State's Advocate informed the court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of it. Considering the uncertainty and the existence of an …

DEEPAK VERMA AND 6 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioners filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief against the State of U.P. and others. The Court noted that mediation between the parties had been attempted but failed. No counsel appeared on behalf of either the petitioners or the respondents to argue the petition. The …

SMT. GAYATRI DEVI AND 6 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioners, Smt. Gayatri Devi and six others, filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition before the Allahabad High Court seeking relief against the State of U.P. and two other respondents. The parties attempted mediation, which ultimately failed. No counsel appeared on behalf of either the …

AZEEM ZAKI AND 4 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioners filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from arrest, but did not appear before the court. The Attorney General for the State informed the court that a charge sheet had been filed, though it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of the police …

RAKESH CHAUHANversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioner, Rakesh Chauhan, filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from arrest. No counsel appeared for the petitioner, while the Attorney General for the State of Uttar Pradesh informed the court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court …

RAJESH AND 6 OTHERSversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioners filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from arrest, but did not appear before the court. The State's Additional Government Advocate informed the court that a charge sheet had been filed, though it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of the …

DHIRENDRA KUMAR PANDEY AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

Petitioners Dhirendra Kumar Pandey and another filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from arrest. The State's counsel informed the court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of it. The High Court noted the …

NISHA YADAV AND 2 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioners filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking protection from arrest. The State informed the court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of the police report. Since the charge sheet existed and the status of …

SHIVDUTTversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

Shivdutt filed Criminal Miscellaneous Writ Petition No. 7784 of 2025 before the Allahabad High Court seeking relief against arrest. No counsel appeared for the petitioner, and the Assistant Government Advocate informed the court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial …

REHANA KHATUN AND 3 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

Petitioners Rehana Khatun and three others filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from arrest. No counsel appeared on behalf of the petitioners. The State, represented by the Additional Government Advocate, informed the court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear …

JITENDRA AND 8 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioners filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from arrest. The State, represented by the Additional Government Advocate, informed the court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of the police report. The Court …

AKASH SINGH AND 8 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioners filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief, but mediation between the parties failed. No counsel appeared on behalf of either the petitioners or the respondents to argue the petition. The Court observed the lack of representation and, consequently, dismissed the …

SHEKHAR PAL AND 3 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioners filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from arrest, but no counsel appeared for them. The State's Advocate General informed the court that a charge sheet had been filed, though it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of the police report. The …

BACHCHA YADAV AND 3 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioners filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from arrest, but did not appear before the court. The State's Additional Government Advocate informed the court that a charge sheet had been filed, though it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of the …

AJAYversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioners, Ajay, filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from arrest. The State of U.P. and other respondents had filed a charge sheet, but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of the police report. The petitioners' counsel argued that arrest should …

SARVESH KUMAR SONKAR AND 2 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

Petitioners Sarvesh Kumar Sonkar and two others filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from arrest. No counsel appeared for the petitioners. The State, through the Additional Government Advocate, informed the Court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether …

SMT. SHEEBA AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioners, Smt. Sheeba and another, filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from arrest. The State, represented by the Additional Government Advocate, indicated that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of the police …

MOHAMMAD MEHDIversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 7 OTHERS

Mohammad Mehdi filed Criminal Miscellaneous Writ Petition No. 25592 of 2025 before the Allahabad High Court seeking relief against the State of U.P. and seven others. The petitioner's counsel, Nayab Ahmad Khan, was not present before the Court. No interim order had been passed in the proceedings. …

SMT. BEENAversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioner, Smt. Beena, filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from potential arrest. The State, represented by the Additional Government Advocate, informed the court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of the …

NAIEEM AND 6 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioners filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief against the State of U.P. and others. The court noted that mediation between the parties had failed. No counsel appeared on behalf of either the petitioners or the respondents to argue the petition. In view of the absence of …

CONSTABLE AJAY KUMAR AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

Constable Ajay Kumar and another filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition (No. 670 of 2025) before the Allahabad High Court against the State of Uttar Pradesh and three others. The petitioners sought relief, but mediation between the parties had failed. No counsel appeared on behalf of either …

BANSH RAJ AND ANOTHERversusState of UP And 2 Others

The petitioners, Bansh Raj and another, filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking protection from arrest. The State's Additional Government Advocate informed the court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of it. The High Court …

PRADEEP KUMARversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

Pradeep Kumar filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from arrest. The State of Uttar Pradesh submitted a charge sheet, but the court was uncertain whether cognizance of the charge sheet had been taken by the trial court. The High Court noted the existence of an interim order in …

RUPESH KUMAR MISHRAversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioner, Rupesh Kumar Mishra, filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from arrest. The State, represented by the Additional Government Advocate, informed the court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of the …

PRIYANKAversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioner, Priyanka, filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from arrest. The State had filed a charge sheet, but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of the police report. The High Court noted the existence of an interim order in the writ petition and …

ANURAG DUBEY ALIAS ASHADHI LALversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioner, Anurag Dubey, filed Criminal Miscellaneous Writ Petition No. 6505 of 2022 before the Allahabad High Court. No counsel appeared for the petitioner and no interim order was passed. The Court observed that the petition had become infructuous due to the lapse of time. Consequently, the …

MOHD. SALEEM AND 9 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The petitioners, Mohd. Saleem and nine others, filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from potential arrest. The State, represented by the Additional Government Advocate, informed the court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken …

TAUFIQ AHMAD @ SAJID AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

Petitioners Taufiq Ahmad and another filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition challenging their potential arrest. The State of Uttar Pradesh and two others responded, and the Attorney General indicated that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken …

MOHD. HAIDER AND 3 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

Petitioners filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking protection from arrest pending the court's taking cognizance of a charge sheet that had been filed. The State, through the Additional Government Advocate, confirmed that the charge sheet was submitted but it was unclear whether …

SANJAY RAMversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioner, Sanjay Ram, filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition challenging his potential arrest. The State of U.P. and two others responded, and the Attorney General informed the court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of the …

AKASH PATEL AND 5 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioners filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from arrest. The State's counsel informed the court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of it. The High Court noted that an interim order was already in force …

NITU RAM @ NITUversusSTATE OF U P AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioner, Nitu Ram, filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition challenging her potential arrest. The State, represented by the Attorney General, informed the court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of the police report. The …

ROHTASH AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

Petitioners Rohtash and another filed Criminal Miscellaneous Writ Petition No. 6552 of 2023 before the Allahabad High Court. The petitioner's counsel, Madan Singh, was not present before the bench. No interim relief had been granted in the proceedings. The court observed that the petition had become …

SIRAJUL HAQ AND 3 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

A criminal miscellaneous writ petition (No. 6624 of 2023) was filed by Sirajul Haq and three others against the State of Uttar Pradesh and three others. The petitioner's counsel, Sandeep Pandey, was not present before the bench. No interim relief was sought or granted during the pendency of the …

ANANT KUMAR DUBEYversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

Anant Kumar Dubey filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief against his arrest. The State of U.P. and three others submitted a charge sheet, but the court was uncertain whether cognizance of the police report had been taken. The learned Additional Government Advocate highlighted …

SANSKAR PANDEYversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioner, Sanskar Pandey, filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from arrest. The State of U.P. and three others responded, and the Attorney General indicated that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of it. The High …

AKHILESH KUMAR SINGH @ THALLUversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioner, Akhilesh Kumar Singh, filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from arrest. The State, represented by the Additional Advocate General, informed the court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of the …

SHRIKRISHNA AND 4 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioners filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief against their arrest. The State informed the court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of the police report. The High Court noted the existence of an interim …

AKHILESH KUMARversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioner, Akhilesh Kumar, filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from arrest. The State, represented by the Attorney General, informed the court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of it. The High Court noted …

ATUL SAXENA AND 3 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

Petitioners Atul Saxena and three others filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from potential arrest. The State, represented by the Additional Government Advocate, informed the Court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken …

ARUN KUMAR TIWARI @ ROHAN TIWARI AND 3 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioners filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from arrest. The State’s Advocate informed the court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of the police report. The High Court noted that, while the charge sheet …

VIKAS AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioners, Vikas and another, filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from potential arrest. The State, represented by the Attorney General, informed the court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of the police …

OM PRAKASH PANDEYversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioner, Om Prakash Pandey, filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from arrest. The State of U.P. and others submitted that a charge sheet had already been filed, but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of the police report. The High Court noted …

VISHNU DAYOL AND 2 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioners sought relief from arrest in a criminal case where a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of the police report. The State's Advocate confirmed the filing of the charge sheet but could not ascertain cognizance. The High Court, …

PRABHU NATH PRASAD AND 2 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioners filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from potential arrest. The State, through the Additional Government Advocate, informed the Court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of the police report. The …

BRIJ PALversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

Petitioner Brij Pal filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition before the Allahabad High Court. The petitioner’s counsel, Rajesh Kumar Tiwari, was not present during the hearing. No interim relief had been granted. The Court observed that the petition had become infructuous due to the lapse of …

VED PRAKASH AND 5 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioners, Ved Prakash and five others, filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition before the Allahabad High Court seeking relief. The court noted that mediation between the parties had failed. No counsel appeared on behalf of either the petitioners or the respondents to argue the petition. …

SMT. KESHRI DEVI AND 2 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U P AND 2 OTHERS

Petitioners Smt. Keshri Devi and two others filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from arrest. The State, represented by the Additional Government Advocate, informed the court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of …

DHYANPAL SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioners filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from arrest. The State informed the court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of it. The High Court noted the existence of an interim order in the writ petition …

BITTU AND 2 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U P AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioners Bittu and two others filed Criminal Miscellaneous Writ Petition No. 6882 of 2022 against the State of Uttar Pradesh and two others. The petition was a criminal writ proceeding before the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad. Counsel for the petitioners, Manoj Kumar Mishra, was not …

BAINAMI SINGH AND 4 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

Petitioners filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from arrest. The State informed the court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of the police report. The High Court noted the existence of an interim order in the …

KAUSHAL KUMAR PATEL AND 4 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

Petitioners Kaushal Kumar Patel and four others filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from arrest. The State counsel informed the Court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of it. The High Court, noting the existence …

HARISH CHANDRA YADAVversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

Harish Chandra Yadav filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief against arrest. The State of U.P. and three others responded, stating that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of it. The High Court noted the uncertainty …

SANJH GUPTA AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioners Sanjh Gupta and another filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from arrest. The State, represented by the Attorney General, informed the court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of the police report. …

HARISH CHANDRA MAURYA AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioners, Harish Chandra Maurya and another, filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from potential arrest. The State, represented by Shailendra Kumar Upadhyay, informed the court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken …

RAJESH KUMAR PATELversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioner, Rajesh Kumar Patel, filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition challenging the prospect of his arrest. The State had filed a charge sheet, but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of the police report. The learned Additional Government Advocate informed the …

ALOK DIWAKAR AND 16 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioners, Alok Diwakar and 16 others, filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking protection from arrest. The State of U.P. informed the Court that a charge sheet had already been filed but it was uncertain whether the trial court had taken cognizance of the police report. The High …

PRAKASH TIWARIversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

A criminal miscellaneous writ petition (No. 6839 of 2023) was filed by Prakash Tiwari against the State of Uttar Pradesh and three others. The petitioner’s counsel, Alkshendra Nath Bajpai and Subedar Shukla, were not present before the court. No interim order had been passed in the matter. The court …

PADAM SINGH AND 2 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

Petitioners Padam Singh and two others filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from arrest. The State, represented by the Additional Government Advocate, informed the court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of the …

OM PRAKASH YADAV AND 3 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

Petitioners Om Prakash Yadav and three others filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking protection from arrest. The State had filed a charge sheet, but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of the police report. The learned Additional Government Advocate confirmed …

MUZAMMIL HUSAINversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

Muzammil Husain filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition challenging his potential arrest. The State of U.P. and others had filed a charge sheet, but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of the police report. The petitioners sought relief to prevent arrest pending …

PRITI PANDEY AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

Petitioners Priti Pandey and another filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition before the Allahabad High Court seeking relief against arrest. The State of U.P. and three others were respondents. The learned Attorney General informed the Court that a charge sheet had been filed by the …

VIRENDRA SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

Virendra Singh filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from arrest. The State informed the court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of it. The High Court noted the existence of an interim order in the petition and, …

BHANU PRATAP SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioner, Bhanu Pratap Singh, filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from arrest. The State, represented by the Additional Government Advocate, informed the court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of the …

RAHUL (HUSBAND) AND 6 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioners, including Rahul (husband), filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking relief from arrest. The State’s Additional Government Advocate informed the court that a charge sheet had been filed but it was unclear whether the trial court had taken cognizance of the police report. …