Allahabad High Court
WRIC/40282/2026 of MOHAMMAD RASHID Vs STATE OF U.P. AND 7 OTHERS on 5 October 2026
JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - C No. - 40282 of 2026 Court No. - 1 HON'BLE AJIT KUMAR, J. HON'BLE GARIMA PRASHAD, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the State. 2. By means of the present writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - C No. - 40282 of 2026
Court No. - 1
HON'BLE AJIT KUMAR, J.
HON'BLE GARIMA PRASHAD, J.
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the State.
2. By means of the present writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed for the following relief: "i) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the Respondent No. 4 and 7 not to associate with the Respondent No. 08 for forcible possession of the suit property on the basis of order of mutation, till final adjudication of will dated 18.04.1983 in Civil Suit being Suit No.346 of 2014 (Shamsher Ahmad vs. Tanveer and others) pending before Civil Judge Senior Division Court No. 11 Azamgarh, in the interest of justice."
3. It is contended on behalf of the petitioner that the private respondents are taking help of the police for getting him evicted from the land in question. It is submitted that since the matter is sub-judice before the civil court and injunction application is already pending, the police at least should not interfere in the private dispute between the parties.
4. Upon a pointed query being made, learned Standing Counsel for the State submits that the police will not be interfering in the pure civil dispute between the parties.
5. Be that as it may, since the petitioner has already approached the court Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Devbratt Yadav, Kumar Gaurav, Ram Pratap Yadav Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Mohammad Rashid .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 7 Others .....Respondent(s)
of competent jurisdiction, he should pray for interim injunction against the private respondents and in case the petitioner has already moved an interim injunction application, he should move an urgency application for disposal of the interim injunction application. In the event such an application is moved, the interim injunction application shall be considered and disposed of within a period two months. We make it clear that the police authorities should not interfere in the private dispute between the parties unless and until there is an emergent situation of law and order.
6. Subject to the aforesaid, the writ petition is consigned to record. October 6, 2026 Kuldeep WRIC No. 40282 of 2026 2 (Garima Prashad,J.) (Ajit Kumar,J.) Digitally signed by :- KULDEEP SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad