Allahabad High Court
HABC/537/2026 of RAVIKANT YADAV AND ANOTHER Vs STATE OF U.P. AND 6 OTHERS on 5 May 2026
JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD HABEAS CORPUS WRIT PETITION No. - 537 of 2026 Court No. - 44 HON'BLE SIDDHARTH, J. HON'BLE VINAI KUMAR DWIVEDI, J. 1. This petition has been filed praying for following reliefs: "(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Habeas Corpus directing the
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
HABEAS CORPUS WRIT PETITION No. - 537 of 2026
Court No. - 44
HON'BLE SIDDHARTH, J.
HON'BLE VINAI KUMAR DWIVEDI, 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. This petition has been filed praying for following reliefs: "(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Habeas Corpus directing the respondents to produce the corpus/petitioner no. 1 before this Hon'ble Court and also direct the respondents to release the petitioner no. 1 (corpus) from their illegal custody declaring the arrest, detention and remand of the petitioner no. 1 as illegal, null and void for not following the direction of Hon'ble Apex Court laid down in "Mihir Rajesh Vs. State of Maharashtra."
(ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari and quash the impugned remand order dated 09.05.2025 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Farrukhabad in Case Crime No. 0247 of 2024, under sections 420, 406 IPC, Police Station Maudarwaja, District Fatehgarh/ Farrukhabad.
(iii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent no. 1 to initiate department enquiry against erring police officials."
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned AGA for the State- respondents and perused the writ petition and the annexures therewith.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners points out that no good ground of arrest has been mentioned in the arrest memo of the petitioner no. 1. Even otherwise, the old proforma has been used by the Investing Officer. Further, Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Pankaj Singh, Pavan Kishore Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A. Ravikant Yadav And Another .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 6 Others .....Respondent(s)
the remand order dated 09.05.2025 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 under Section 482 No. 3963 of 2022 Sangam Lal Vs. State of U.P. and Others.
4. Learned AGA has opposed the submission but could not dispute the aforesaid fact.
5. In view of the above, the impugned order of arrest, detention and remand of the petitioner no. 1 are held to be illegal. The remand order dated 09.05.2025 passed by the learned Remand Magistrate, District Farrukhabad in Case Crime No. 247 of 2024 u/s 420, 406, 467, 468, 471 IPC, P.S. Maudarwaja, District Farrukhabad, is hereby quashed. The arrest and detention of the petitioner no. 1 is held to be illegal. He is directed to be released forthwith without waiting for supply of certified copy of this order.
6. The writ petition is allowed.
7. However, it is open for the respondents to proceed against the petitioners afresh in accordance with law. May 6, 2026 Shubham HABC No. 537 of 2026 2 (Vinai Kumar Dwivedi,J.) (Siddharth,J.) Digitally signed by :- SHUBHAM KUMAR AGRAHARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad