HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 19601 of 2025 Court No. - 48 HON'BLE CHANDRA DHARI SINGH, J. HON'BLE LAKSHMI KANT SHUKLA, J. 1. The instant writ petition has been filed by petitioner seeking for the following reliefs:- "i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari to call for record of the case and quash the impugned notice 11-07-2025 passed by respondent no.2 (Additional District Magistrate Judicial) Sonebhadra u/s 3(1) U.P. Control of Gunda Act 1970 (Annexure No.2) to this writ petition. ii) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of Mandmus directing the respondent no.2 to stay the further proceeding of case no. D202516660000990 of 2025 state vs Roukat Bhattacharjee S/o Ashish Bhattacharjee u/s 3(1) U.P. Control of Gunda Act 1970 Police Station Shaktinagar District Sonebhadra during the pendency of the writ petition before this Hon'ble court, otherwise the petitioner shall suffer an irreparable loss and injury." 2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of petitioner submitted that impugned notice dated 11.07.2025 was issued by the respondent no.2 Additional District Magistrate (Judicial), Sonebhadra, District Sonebhadra is illegal, unjust, improper and without application of mind. It is further submitted that petitioner is a student of M.Tech. Power System Semester-II and has a great future. It is further submitted that said notice issued by respondent no.2 is non speaking and no reason has been assigned while issuing the said notice under Section 3 (1) of U.P. Control of Gunda Act. All the allegations made in the said notice are false and fabricated. It is further submitted that petitioner has been falsely implicated due to village enmity. It is further submitted that respondent no.2 has issued the said Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Mani Shanker Pandey, Rama Nand Shukla Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A. Raukat Bhattacharjee .....Petitioner(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Respondent(s) notice without giving proper opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and the same deserves to be set aside. 3. Per contra, learned A.G.A. appearing on behalf of State vehemently opposed the instant petition and submitted that while issuing the aforesaid notice to the petitioner, the respondent no.2 has given time and date to the petitioner to appear and file objection before the Magistrate pursuant to the impugned notice. He vehemently submitted that it is wrong to say that notice has been issued to the petitioner without giving prior opportunity of hearing whereas the petitioner has chosen not to appear before respondent no.2 and has filed the instant writ petition before this Court at premature stage. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of State submitted that in view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the writ petition has been filed at premature stage and there are no merit or ground available to the petitioner for invoking extra-ordinary jurisdiction to interfere in the said notice issued by respondent no.2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of State, therefore, submitted that the instant writ petition may be dismissed as devoid of merits. 4. At this juncture, Sri M. S. Pandey, learned counsel appearing on behalf of petitioner fairly conceded that since the petitioner is a student of M.Tech 2nd Semester and his examination is going on, he may be given an opportunity to appear and file objection before respondent no.2 after examination. 5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of State submitted that he has no objection to the aforesaid prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner. 6. Heard Sri M. S. Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned A.G.A. appearing on behalf of State and perused the record. 7. Taking into consideration the submission and prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner and no objection by the State counsel, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the petitioner to appear and file objection before respondent no.2 -Additional District Magistrate (Judicial), Sonebhadra, District Sonebhadra on or before 11.11.2025. Thereafter, the respondent no.2 is directed to pass appropriate and reasoned order in accordance with law after taking into consideration the objection filed by the petitioner and giving opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. October 9, 2025 AKT CRLP No. 19601 of 2025 2 (Lakshmi Kant Shukla,J.) (Chandra Dhari Singh,J.) Digitally signed by :- ASHOK KUMAR TRIPATHI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad