Allahabad High Court
CRLP/21238/2026 of HARIHAR PRASAD Vs STATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS on 20 September 2026
JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 21238 of 2026 Court No. - 48 HON'BLE CHANDRA DHARI SINGH, J. HON'BLE TARUN SAXENA, J. 1. None appeared on behalf of the petitioner even in the revised call to address the Court whereas Mr. Rizwan Ahmad, learned AGA appearing for the
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 21238 of 2026
Court No. - 48
HON'BLE CHANDRA DHARI SINGH, J.
HON'BLE TARUN SAXENA, 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. None appeared on behalf of the petitioner even in the revised call to address the Court whereas Mr. Rizwan Ahmad, learned AGA appearing for the State-respondent is present.
2. The instant writ petition has been filed with the following main reliefs:- "i. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of writ of mandamus commanding the respondent no.2 to pass an appropriate order for further investigation upon application moved by petitioner before him on 05.01.2026 (Annexure no.5 to the writ petition).
ii. Issue a writ, order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper under the facts and circumstances of the case."
3. Learned AGA appearing for the State-respondents submitted and apprised the Court that after completion of the statutory investigation, the Investigating Officer has submitted charge sheet before the court concerned and thereupon cognizance has already been taken by the court concerned on 18.06.2026. It is further submitted that if the petitioner has any grievance regarding the investigation, he may take appropriate steps in accordance with law
4. Heard learned AGA appearing for the State-respondents and perused the record.
5. Taking into consideration the statement given by the learned AGA as Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Manoj Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A. Harihar Prasad .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 2 Others .....Respondent(s)
well as none appearance of the learned counsel for the petitioner and also taking into consideration the fact that after investigation charge sheet has been submitted and thereupon cognizance has already been taken by the court concerned on 18.06.2026, therefore, we do not find any reason to keep the writ petition for further adjudication. However, in case, the petitioner has any grievance regarding the investigation, he may take appropriate steps in accordance with law.
6. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of with liberty aforesaid. September 21, 2026 Prajapati RK CRLP No. 21238 of 2026 2 (Tarun Saxena,J.) (Chandra Dhari Singh,J.) Digitally signed by :- RAMKESH PRAJAPATI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad