Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 4, Cited by 0]

Allahabad High Court

Ashok Kumar vs State Of U.P. And Another on 18 September, 2025

Author: Salil Kumar Rai

Bench: Salil Kumar Rai





HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 


Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:168004-DB
 

 
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD 
 
CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 21038 of 2025   
 
   Ashok Kumar    
 
  .....Petitioner(s)   
 
 Versus  
 
   State of U.P. and Another    
 
  .....Respondent(s)       
 
   
 
  
 
Counsel for Petitioner(s)   
 
:   
 
Satyendra Singh   
 
  
 
Counsel for Respondent(s)   
 
:   
 
G.A.   
 
     
 
 Court No. - 45
 
   
 
 HON'BLE SALIL KUMAR RAI, J.  

HON'BLE ZAFEER AHMAD, J.

The present petition has been filed for the following relief:-

"i. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quash the impugned Remand Order dated 15/05/2025, passed by the court of Civil Judge (Junior Division) Court No. 1 Muzaffarnagar in First Information Report dated 24.01.2025 registered as Case Crime No. 03 of 2025 under sections 420 IPC and 66(D) IT Act, Police Station Cyber Crime, District Muzaffarnagar.
ii. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the release of the petitioner from Jail in Case Crime No. 03 of 2025 under sections 420 IPC and 66(D) IT Act, Police Station Cyber Crime, District Muzaffarnagar forthwith."

A perusal of the order dated 15.05.2025, passed by the Civil Judge (Junior Division) Court No. 1 District Muzaffarnagar shows that the petitioner was produced before the concerned court on a Warrant B. The grievance of the petitioner is that the requirements of Section 50 Cr.P.C. and Article 22 had not been fulfilled. The requirements under Section 50 Cr.P.C. are on the concerned police while arresting the detenue and not a requirement for a warrant issued under Section 267 Cr.P.C. There was no arrest of the petitioner. The petitioner had been initially arrested in Haryana and was already under detention.

The relief claimed is not maintainable.

The petition is dismissed.

(Zafeer Ahmad,J.) (Salil Kumar Rai,J.) September 18, 2025 Ranjeet Sahu