Allahabad High Court
CRLP/11394/2025 of MOHIT RANJAN YADAV Vs STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. HOME U.P. LKO. AND OTHERS on 3 December 2025
JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 11394 of 2025 Court No. - 11 HON'BLE ABDUL MOIN, J. HON'BLE MRS. BABITA RANI, J. 1. Heard. 2. At the very outset, learned counsel for the petitioner states that although instant petition has been filed praying for quashing of the
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
LUCKNOW
CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 11394 of 2025
Court No. - 11
HON'BLE ABDUL MOIN, J.
HON'BLE MRS. BABITA RANI, 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.
2. At the very outset, learned counsel for the petitioner states that although instant petition has been filed praying for quashing of the notice dated 12.11.2025 under Section 3 of the U.P. Control of Goondas Act, 1970 but as he has already submitted reply in pursuance of the said notice on 28.11.2025 as such he prays that the competent authority be directed to decide the matter after considering the reply in accordance with law under relevant rules within a specified time.
3. Considering the aforesaid, the writ petition stands disposed of with a direction to the competent authority to decide the matter after considering the reply submitted by the petitioner to the impugned notice which matter would be decided within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy this order.
4. The petitioner while submitting the certified copy of this order would again annex a reply which has been sent to him to the impugned notice.
5. It is made clear that this Court has not gone into the merits of the claim set forth by the petitioner.
December 3, 2025 prateek Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Ashish Srivastava, Sakshi Srivastava Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A. (Mrs. Babita Rani,J.) (Abdul Moin,J.) Mohit Ranjan Yadav .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko. And Others .....Respondent(s) Digitally signed by :- PRATEEK ARORA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench