Shubhi Mishra and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Secy. Home Lko. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Shubhi Mishra and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Secy. Home Lko. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Liberty to the applicants to seek the benefit of the Apex Court judgments in Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI and Musheer Alam v. State of U.P. and liberty to approach the Court again at the appropriate stage; coupled with an interim direction that for 30 days the Police Officer concerned shall not take coercive action against the applicants, no application in that regard being entertainable.

Issue for consideration

Whether the application (which originally sought quashing of the Sessions Judge, Sitapur order dated 21.05.2025 in Criminal Revision No. 231/2024) should be disposed of with liberty to the applicants to seek the benefit of the Apex Court judgments in Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI and Musheer Alam v. State of U.P. and to re-approach the Court at the appropriate stage. +1 more

Court's answer

Since learned counsel confined her prayer to seeking the benefit of the Apex Court judgments in Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI, (2022) 10 SCC 51 and Musheer Alam v. State of U.P., 2025 SCC OnLine SC 116, and the learned AGA raised no objection, the present application stands disposed of with liberty as prayed for, i.e., liberty to avail the benefit of those judgments and to approach the Court again at the appropriate stage for appropriate relief.

Ratio / Principle

Taking note of the facts and of the observations of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Satendra Kumar Antil (supra) and Musheer Alam (supra), the Court observes that for a period of 30 days from the date of the order the Police Officer concerned is expected not to take any coercive action against the applicants in the aforesaid case, and that no application in this regard shall be entertained.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Lucknow Bench), Court No. 11, Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania, J. — Application U/S 482 No. 8496 of 2025 (decided 26.09.2025); Shubhi Mishra and 3 others v. State of U.P. (thru. Secy. Home, Lko.) and another. The applicants had prayed for quashing of the order dated 21.05.2025 passed by the Court of Sessions Judge, Sitapur in 'Dev Kapoor vs Shubhi Mishra and others', Criminal Revision No. 231/2024, by which that Court had partly allowed the criminal revision filed by opposite party no. 2. At the outset, learned counsel confined the prayer to seeking the benefit of the Apex Court judgments in Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI, (2022) 10 S.C.R. 351 : (2022) 10 SCC 51 and Musheer Alam v. State of U.P., 2025 SCC OnLine SC 116, with liberty to approach the Court again at the appropriate stage; the learned AGA raised no objection. The Court disposed of the application with liberty as prayed for, and further observed — taking note of the said Apex Court decisions — that for 30 days from the date of the order the Police Officer concerned would not take any coercive action against the applicants, it being made clear that no application in that regard would be entertained.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 8496 of 2025

Shubhi Mishra And 3 Others

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

State Of U.P. Thru. Its Secy. Home Lko. And Another .....Opposite Party(s) Counsel for Applicant(s) : Dr. Pooja Singh, Abhishek Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

Court No. - 11

HON'BLE SAURABH LAVANIA, J.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant(s) and learned AGA for the State as well as perused the record.

The present application has been preferred seeking following main relief(s):-

"That for the facts, reasons and circumstances narrated in the accompanying affidavit it is most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to quash the impugned order dated 21.05.2025 passed by the Court of Sessions Judge, Sitapur in 'Dev Kapoor vs Shubhi Mishra and others', Criminal Revision No. 231/2024 through which the Learned Court has partly allowed the criminal revision filed by the opposite party no. 2 in a very casual, unjust and mechanical manner, without looking into the facts and evidences on record in favor of the petitioners, which is annexed as Annexure No.1 to the affidavit filed in support of the present petition.."

At the very outset, learned counsel for the applicant(s) submitted that at this stage, she is confining her prayer to seek the benefit of the judgment(s) passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another, (2022) 10 S.C.R. 351 : (2022) 10 SCC 51 and Musheer Alam vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and Another, 2025 SCC OnLine SC 116 for which liberty may be given to the applicant(s) and liberty may also be given to the applicant(s) to approach this Court again at appropriate stage for seeking appropriate relief.

Learned AGA has no objection to the prayer made by learned counsel for the applicant(s).

Keeping in view the aforesaid, the present application is disposed of with liberty as prayed for.

Taking note of the facts of the case and also the observations made by the

A482 No. 8496 of 2025

2

Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Satendra Kumar Antil (Supra) and Musheer Alam (Supra) , this Court is of the view that it would be appropriate to observe that it is expected from the Police Officer concerned that for a period of 30 days from today, they would not take any coercive action against the applicant(s) in the aforesaid case. It is made clear that in this regard, no application shall be entertained.

(Saurabh Lavania,J.)

September 26, 2025

Anand/-

Digitally signed by :- ANAND KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench