Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 161173 (ALL)

SAURABH KUMAR THRU. HIS WIFE SONIKA SINGH v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. ADDL. CHIEF SECY. HOME LKO. AND OTHERS

HABC/318/2025 · 2025-08-29

Rajesh Singh Chauhan, S Q H Rizvi

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW HABEAS CORPUS WRIT PETITION No. - 318 of 2025 Court No. - 9 HON'BLE RAJESH SINGH CHAUHAN, J. HON'BLE SYED QAMAR HASAN RIZVI, J. 1. Heard Shri Anand Tripathi, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri G.D. Bhatt, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State. 2. This matter has been taken up today on the mention being made on 27.08.2025 pressing urgency in the matter. 3. By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for the following relief:- "(i) to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Habeas Corpus directing opposite parties to produce the detenue petitioner before this Hon'ble Court and set him at liberty forthwith, in the interest of justice." 4. Shri G.D. Bhatt, learned Additional Government Advocate has produced a copy of instructions letter dated 27.08.2025 provided by the Incharge Inspector/ Investigating Officer, Police Station-Cyber Crime, District- Balrampur addressing to the Government Advocate, High Court, Lucknow. The same is taken on record. 5. In the aforesaid instructions, it has been categorically stated that on account of serious allegation against the present petitioner relating to Cyber Crime and siphoning the huge amount to the Pakistan, he was called for interrogation and arrested on 27.08.2025, thereafter his remand has been obtained from the competent court and sent him to the District Jail, Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Anand Tripathi Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A. Saurabh Kumar Thru. His Wife Sonika Singh .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. And Others .....Respondent(s) Balrampur. 6. Having considered the aforesaid written instructions, nothing remains to be adjudicated in the present writ petition. 7. Therefore, the writ petition is consigned to record. 8. It is needless to say that if the petitioner is aggrieved from any inaction on the part of the authorities, he may avail appropriate remedy before appropriate court of law. August 29,2025 Suresh/ HABC No. 318 of 2025 2 (Syed Qamar Hasan Rizvi,J.) (Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.) Digitally signed by :- SURESH CHANDRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench