Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 13874 (ALL)

SHIV PRASAD v. STATE OF U.P.AND 3 OTHERS

CRLP/11580/2025 · 2026-10-07

Ajay Kumar Ii, Rajeev Misra

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 11580 of 2025 Court No. - 47 HON'BLE RAJEEV MISRA, J. HON'BLE DR. AJAY KUMAR-II, J. 1. Case called out in revised list. 2. Even though the name of Mr. Mani Yagnesh Tripathi is duly published in the cause list as counsel for petitioner but neither he nor anyone on his behalf is present to press the present writ petition even in the revised call. 3. Learned A.G.A. representing the State respondents 1, 2 and 3 is present. 4. Petitioner Shiv Prasad has approached this Court by means of present Criminal Misc. Writ Petition challenging the first informant report dated 28.05.2024 lodged by first informant/respondent-4 Bachcha Yadav and registered as Case Crime No. 0196 of 2024 under Sections 279, 337, 338, 304-A, 427 IPC, Police Station Bisanda, District Banda. 5. Present writ petition came up for admission on 03.06.2025 and this Court passed the following order: "1. At the very outset, learned AGA has pointed out that in the instant case charge-sheet has already been submitted. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner could not dispute the aforesaid fact but prays and is granted ten days' time to file a supplementary affidavit, annexing the copy of the charge-sheet and the material collected during the course of investigation. 3. In view thereof, list this writ petition on 15.7.2025. " 6. Upon perusal of the order-sheet, we find that no interim order is operating in the present writ petition. Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Kshitij, Mani Yagyesh Tripathi Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A. Shiv Prasad .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P.And 3 Others .....Respondent(s) 7. Learned counsel for petitioner has not complied with the order dated 03.06.2025. 8. Since charge-sheet has already been submitted in the instant case, we are of the view that cognizance has been taken by the jurisdictional Magistrate by now upon aforesaid charge sheet. 9. As a result, present writ petition fails and is liable to be dismissed as having rendered infructuous. 10. It is accordingly dismissed as having rendered infructuous. 11. Interim order, if any, shall stand vacated. October 8, 2026 ss CRLP No. 11580 of 2025 2 (Dr. Ajay Kumar-II,J.) (Rajeev Misra,J.) Digitally signed by :- SANDEEP SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad