Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 5215 (ALL)

CHANDRASHEKHAR KUMAR MAJHI v. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND 3 OTHERS

CRLP/18958/2026 · 2026-09-07

Mayur Jain Jt Registrar J Listing, Tarun Saxena

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 18958 of 2026 Court No. - 48 HON'BLE CHANDRA DHARI SINGH, J. HON'BLE TARUN SAXENA, J. 1. The instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with the following main prayers:- "I. To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned F.I.R. dated 20.07.2026 registered as Case Crime No. 0204/2026, under Section 3(1) U.P. Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, Police Station Padri, District Mirzapur. II. To Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents not to arrest the petitioner in pursuance to F.I.R. dated 20.07.2026 registered as Case Crime No. 0204/2026, under Section 3(1) U.P. Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, Police Station Padri, District Mirzapur." 2. After some length of arguments, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner made an innocuous prayer that he may be permitted to withdraw the instant writ petition with liberty to avail the appropriate remedy available under the law before the appropriate Court as advised. 3. Learned AGA appearing on behalf of the State-respondents vehemently opposed the instant writ petition but has no objection on innocuous prayer made by learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner. 4. Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner as well as Mr. K.P. Pathak, learned A.G.A. appearing on behalf of the State- Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Varun Kumar Chaubey Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A. Chandrashekhar Kumar Majhi .....Petitioner(s) State Of Uttar Pradesh And 3 Others .....Respondent(s) respondents and perused the material available on record. 5. Since, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has not pressed the instant writ petition on merits, only made innocuous prayer to avail appropriate alternative remedy as advised, we are inclined to allow the innocuous prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner. 6. Accordingly, the instant writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as prayed. September 8, 2026 Atul CRLP No. 18958 of 2026 2 (Tarun Saxena,J.) (Chandra Dhari Singh,J.) Digitally signed by :- ATUL KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad