HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW HABEAS CORPUS WRIT PETITION No. - 397 of 2025 Court No. - 13 HON'BLE SAURABH LAVANIA, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Vinay Kumar Shahi, learned AGA for the State of U.P. as well as perused the record. 2. The instant petition has been preferred seeking following main relief(s):- "i) A writ, order or direction in the nature of Habeas Corpus directing the opposite parties to produce the detenue Mahendra Pratap son of Late Shiv Kumar before this Hon'ble Court and secure his release through his next friend Durgawati (Mother) resident of Village- Beldar Ka Purwa H/O Sariyanwan Police Station- Poora Kalandar District Ayodhya, in the interest of justice." 3. At the very outset, Sri Vinay Kumar Shahi, learned AGA, based upon the instructions received from Sub-Inspector, Police Station- Raunahi, District- Ayodhya, a copy of which is placed before this Court and the same is taken on record, stated that the allegations levelled in the instant petition regarding illegal detention of Mahendra Pratap (detenue), an employee of Limka Factory Dabhasemar, Police Station- Kotwali Nagar, District- Ayodhya, are misconceived, as the detenue has indicated the name of opposite party No. 5/Roli as nominee in his service records and the detenue is under treatment at the residence of opposite party No. 5/Roli. 4. Based upon the instructions aforesaid, learned AGA also stated that petitioner/Durgawati (Mother of detenue) has also settled the dispute, as would appear from the application dated 13.06.2025, copy of which is annexed with the instructions placed before this Court today, which contains the thumb impressions/signatures of Durgawati (Mother of detenue), Roli (opposite party No. 5 herein), Harsih Jeewani (opposite party No. 8 herein), Dinesh (opposite party No. 6 herein), and one Akhilendra Pratap. 5. After considering the aforesaid, on being confronted, learned counsel for the petitioners says that he does not want to press this petition and it may accordingly be dismissed as withdrawn/not pressed. 6. In view of above, the instant petition is dismissed as withdrawn/not pressed. October 31, 2025 Arun/- Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Ajay Kumar Gupta, Ambrish Kumar Pandey Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A. (Saurabh Lavania,J.) Mahendra Pratap Thru. His Next Friend Durgawati (Mother) .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko And 7 Others .....Respondent(s) Digitally signed by :- ARUN KUMAR GANGWAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench