HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 21864 of 2026 Court No. - 73 HON'BLE SANDEEP JAIN, J. 1. The instant writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed seeking the following relief: “I. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding/directing the respondent no. 2 to conclude Appeal No. 15 of 2026, Vijit Tyagi versus State of U.P., within a short stipulated period and this Hon’ble Court may graciously be pleased to stay the effect and operation of the impugned order dated 17.07.2026 passed by the District Magistrate, Hapur, in Case No. 499 of 2025 (Computerized Case No. D202511730000499), under Sections 3/4 of the U.P. Control of Goondas Act, 1970, State versus Vijit Tyagi @ Babbu Tyagi @ Bablu, and Criminal Appeal No. 15 of 2026, under Section 6 of the U.P. Control of Goondas Act, 1970, Vijit Tyagi @ Babbu Tyagi @ Bablu versus State of U.P., Police Station Hapur Nagar, District Hapur, during the pendency of the said appeal before the Commissioner, Meerut Region, Meerut.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that on the basis of eleven cases, proceedings under Section 3/4 of the U.P. Control of Goondas Act, 1970, were initiated against the petitioner and, by order dated 17.07.2026 passed by the District Magistrate, Hapur, the petitioner has been externed for a period of six months from the limits of District Hapur. The said order has been challenged by the petitioner by filing Appeal No. 1856 of 2026 (Computerized Case No. C202611000001856) (Vijit Tyagi @ Babbu Tyagi @ Bablu versus State of U.P.) under Section 6 of the U.P. Control of Goondas Act, 1970, before the competent appellate authority, in which a stay application has also been moved. However, neither the stay application nor the appeal has yet been decided by the Commissioner, Meerut Region, Meerut. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that, till the disposal of the appeal, the operation of the impugned order dated 17.07.2026 may be stayed and the appellate authority may further be directed to decide the appeal expeditiously.. 3. Learned A.G.A. submits that, as per the instructions received by him, at Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Manoj Kumar Tripathi Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A. Vijit Tyagi @ Babbu Tyagi @ Bablu .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 3 Others .....Respondent(s) present eleven cases are registered against the petitioner, which indicates that he is a habitual offender. 4. It is apparent that the appeal preferred by the petitioner under Section 6 of the Act, 1970, is pending before the competent appellate authority. As such, this Court is not inclined to examine the validity of the impugned order on merits at this stage. 5. In view of the above, it would be appropriate to direct the appellate authority to decide the stay application as well as the appeal expeditiously. 6. In view of the foregoing facts and circumstances, the Commissioner, Meerut Region, Meerut, is directed to decide the stay application in Appeal No. 1856 of 2026 (Computerized Case No. C202611000001856) (Vijit Tyagi @ Babbu Tyagi @ Bablu versus State of U.P.), under Section 6 of the U.P. Control of Goondas Act, 1970, within a period of one month and the appeal itself within a period of two months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order. 7. Accordingly, the instant writ petition is disposed of. September 11, 2026 Mayank CRLP No. 21864 of 2026 2 (Sandeep Jain,J.) Digitally signed by :- MAYANK KUMAR SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad