Allahabad High Court
HABC/536/2026 of MINOR X AND ANOTHER Vs STATE OF U.P. AND 5 OTHERS on 5 May 2026
JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD HABEAS CORPUS WRIT PETITION No. - 536 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: "(1) A writ, order or direction in the nature of Habeas Corpus for production of the
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
HABEAS CORPUS WRIT PETITION No. - 536 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: "(1) A writ, order or direction in the nature of Habeas Corpus for production of the corpus i.e. petitioner no. 1 before this Hon'ble Court and allow the corpus to meet the petitioner no. 2 without any interference and to set him at liberty from detention and custody of respondent no. 5."
2. Heard Shri Ankit Tandon and Shri Riyaz Ahmad Siddiqui, 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 arrest memo of the petitioner no. 1 is incomplete and does not contain the grounds of arrest. Further, the remand order dated 07.04.2026 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 Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Gaurav Tiwari, Mumtaz Ahmad Siddiqui, Riyaz Ahmad Siddiqui Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A. Minor X And Another .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 5 Others .....Respondent(s)
07.04.2026 passed by the learned Remand Magistrate, District Moradabad in Case Crime No. 201 of 2026 u/s 109(1), 3(5), 351(2) of Bhartiya Nyaya Sahnita (B.N.S), 2023, P.S. Civil Lines, District Moradabad, 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. 536 of 2026 2 (Vinai Kumar Dwivedi,J.) (Siddharth,J.) Digitally signed by :- SHUBHAM KUMAR AGRAHARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad