Created by Fuzzy Cloud | Our 2nd AI-Powered Solution
414 judgments · newest first · showing 401–414
The petitioner, Rahul Singh, filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition challenging the prospect of his 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 noted …
Usha Devi filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition challenging her 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 it. The High Court noted the uncertainty regarding cognizance and, considering …
Petitioners Smt. Arisha 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 it. The High Court …
The petitioners 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 petitioners, Rizwan Saiyab Siddiqui and two others, filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking protection from arrest. They argued that although a charge sheet had been filed by the investigating officer, the court had not yet taken cognizance of the police report. The State, …
The petitioners, Shahrukh and nine 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 the petitioners or the respondents to argue the petition. In the absence of …
The petitioners Jitendra Singh and five others filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition (No. 3323 of 2022) against the State of Uttar Pradesh and two others. The petitioners' counsel was absent, and no interim relief had been granted. The court observed that the petition had become infructuous …
The appellant Raiyyan was convicted in a capital case and appealed his conviction. The Division Bench of the Allahabad High Court was divided, and under Section 392 of the CrPC the matter was referred to a third judge, who allowed the appeal and ordered the appellant's release. One of the original …
Petitioner Kamal Gaurav Sahu filed a habeas corpus petition alleging that his arrest on 08‑02‑2026 and subsequent remand were illegal because the police failed to provide written grounds of arrest as mandated by the Constitution and Supreme Court precedent. The petition sought a writ of mandamus for …
Petitioner No.1 was arrested on 08.02.2026 by the police without being furnished written grounds of arrest, contrary to Supreme Court pronouncements. The arrest memo and the subsequent remand order were prepared on a printed proforma, indicating a mechanical exercise of power. The petitioners …
The case arose from a village dispute over a newly built toilet wall, which led to a violent clash on 14 June 1981. The prosecution alleged that nine accused, including Israil Khan and Baley Khan, formed an unlawful assembly, armed themselves with lathis and other weapons, and assaulted the …
The appellants Mahendra, Bankey and Pappu (Mahipal) were convicted for the murder of Fateh Singh under IPC sections 302 and 34 and sentenced to life imprisonment. The prosecution case relied on two eye‑witnesses, the son and brother of the deceased, and forensic evidence. The appellants challenged …
The appellant, Pappu @ Mahipal, filed Criminal Appeal No. 724 of 2006 against the State of U.P. The matter was heard by a bench comprising Hon’ble Justice Siddharth and Hon’ble Justice Jai Krishna Upadhyay of the Allahabad High Court. The court dismissed the appeal without providing detailed …
