HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD HABEAS CORPUS WRIT PETITION No. - 250 of 2026 Court No. - 46 HON'BLE SIDDHARTH, J. HON'BLE JAI KRISHNA UPADHYAY, J. 1. Supplementary affidavit filed today annexing therewith the remand order dated 8.2.2026 passed by Remand Magistrate is taken on record. 2. Heard Sri Manish Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioner; learned AGA for State-respondents and perused the material on record. 3. The present habeas corpus writ petition has been filed by learned counsel for the petitioner seeking the following reliefs:- I. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent no. 2 and 3 to produce and release the corpus/petitioner, namely, Kamal Gaurav Sahu S/o Shri Ram Vilash Sahu R/o E-69 Adarsh Nagar, Lal Colony, Barra-1, Police Station- Barra, District- Kanpur Nagar from their illegal custody, while declaring the arrest, detention and remand of the petitioner as illegal, null and void in pursuance of F.I.R. dated 03-07-2025 in Case Crime No. 270 of 2025, u/s 318(4), 338, 336 (3) and 340 (2) of B.N.S., P.S.-Kalyanpur, District- Commissionerate Kanpur City, for not following the direction of the Hon'ble Court in Mihir Rajesh Vs. State of Maharashtra and another. II. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the remand order dated 08-02-2026 and subsequent remand orders passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-II, Kapur Nagar in pursuance of F.I.R. dated 03-07-2025 in Case Crime No. 270 of 2025, u/s Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Aditaya Kumar Kashyap, Manish Kumar Pandey Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A. Kamal Gaurav Sahu .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P And 3 Others .....Respondent(s) 318(4), 338, 336 (3) and 340 (2) of B.N.S., P.S.- Kalyanpur, District Commissionearte Kanpur City. III. Issue any other suitable writ order or direction as this Hon'ble court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case. IV. Allow the writ petition with cost in favour of the petitioner. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that on 08.02.2026, petitioner was illegally arrested. The respondent Nos.2 & 3 failed to comply with the mandatory constitutional requirement of furnishing the grounds of arrest to the petitioner in writing, which is evident from the arrest memo itself. The petitioner was neither supplied written grounds of arrest at the time of arrest nor prior to his production before the learned Remand Magistrate, thereby vitiating the arrest and subsequent remand. The Apex Court recently in Mihir Rajesh v. State of Maharashtra & Anr., 2025 SCC OnLine SC 2356 has categorically held that communication of grounds of arrest in writing is mandatory in all offences and that non-compliance renders the arrest and remand illegal. He has also relied upon the judgement and order passed by this Court in the case of Umang Rastogi and Another Vs. State of U.P. and three others, passed in Habeas Corpus Writ Petition No.35 of 2026. Finally it has been pointed out that remand order dated 8.2.2026 has been passed by learned Magistrate on printed proforma. 5. Learned AGA for State-respondents has opposed the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner, but could not dispute the aforesaid facts. A photostat copy of "ground of arrest" has been placed before the Court by learned AGA, which is incomplete. 6. After considering the above arguments and judgement relied by the learned counsel for the petitioner, we are of the view that the arrest of petitioner and the remand order passed by the Magistrate dated 8.2.2026 are illegal. This Apex Court in Gautam Navlakha Vs. N.Ι.Α., (2022) 13 SCC 542 has held that a writ of habeas corpus is maintainable where the remand is absolutely illegal or passed mechanically. 7. The aforesaid remand order and arrest memo prepared by the HABC No. 250 of 2026 2 respondent no.3 dated 8.2.2026 are hereby quashed. 8. The above noted habeas corpus writ petition is allowed. 9. Petitioner is directed to be released from custody forthwith without waiting for supply of the certified copy of this order. 10. Office is directed to issue certified copy of this order to the petitioner on payment of usual charges. 11. Keeping in view of the judgment of this Court in the case of Umang Rastogi (supra), the Commissioner of Police, District Kanpur Nagar, respondent no.2, is directed to initiate disciplinary proceeding against the Investigating Officer of this case and submit compliance report before Registrar (Compliance) of this Court on or before 30.3.2026 to be kept on record. 12. The Remand Magistrate is directed be cautious in future while passing remand orders. 13. The Registrar (Compliance) of this Court is directed to communicate this order to the police official and the Remand Magistrate aforesaid and District Judge, Kanpur Nagar, within 24 hours. 14. It is open for the respondents to proceed against the petitioner afresh in accordance with law. March 19, 2026 Ruchi Agrahari HABC No. 250 of 2026 3 (Jai Krishna Upadhyay,J.) (Siddharth,J.) Digitally signed by :- RUCHI AGRAHARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- RUCHI AGRAHARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- RUCHI AGRAHARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad