HABC/493/2026 of SATYABHAN YADAV @ GOLU Vs STATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS on 17 May 2026

1. Heard Mr. Anupam Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.G.A. for the respondents-State.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that an F.I.R. bearing No. 1478 of 2025 was registered on 24.12.2025 at 22:52 hours under various provisions. It is evident from the record that on the same date, a notice under Section 35(3) of BNSS was issued granting two days' time to appear before the Investigating Officer. However, in blatant violation of Section 35(5) of BNSS, without awaiting any non-compliance of the said notice, the petitioner was shown to have been arrested on 25.12.2025 at 20:30 hours. The learned Remand Magistrate, without due application of judicial mind, and in disregard of statutory safeguards, mechanically remanded the petitioner to judicial custody through a printed proforma order devoid of any recorded satisfaction. Further, despite the petitioner submitting a detailed written complaint before the Magistrate disclosing cognizable offences, no direction for investigation was issued. Subsequently, two additional FIRs were engineered at the instance of the Superintendent of Police, Lalitpur, with identical formatting and drafting, purportedly to fabricate criminal antecedents. Further, the remand order dated 26.12.2025 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 Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Krishn Kumar, Sandesh Niranjan, Shravan Kumar Yadav Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A. Satyabhan Yadav @ Golu .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 2 Others .....Respondent(s)

under Section 482 No. 3963 of 2022 Sangam Lal Vs. State of U.P. and Others

3. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the submission but could not dispute the aforesaid fact.

4. In view of the above, it is clear that there is blatant violation of Section 35(5) of BNSS. The remand order dated 26.12.2025 passed by the learned Remand Magistrate, District Lalitpur in Case Crime No. 1478 of 2025 u/s 316(2), 352, 351(3), 126(2), 308(5) Bhartiya Nyaya Sahnita (B.N.S), 2023, P.S. Kotwali, District Lalitpur, 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.

5. The writ petition is allowed.

6. However, it is open for the respondents to proceed against the petitioner afresh in accordance with law. May 18, 2026 Shubham HABC No. 493 of 2026 2 (Vinai Kumar Dwivedi,J.) (Siddharth,J.) Digitally signed by :- SHUBHAM KUMAR AGRAHARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad