Vivek Kumar Mishra @ Ashish Kumar Mishra vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Vivek Kumar Mishra @ Ashish Kumar Mishra vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Interim order only: notice issued to opposite party no. 2 (steps within a week), counter affidavit within three weeks, rejoinder affidavit within a week thereafter, matter to be listed thereafter; meanwhile criminal proceedings in Criminal Case No. 1834/2025 arising out of Case Crime No. 310/2008 (Sections 457, 380, 411 IPC, P.S. Karaudi Kala, District Sultanpur) shall remain stayed till the next date of listing, so far as the present applicant is concerned. Application otherwise pending; no final relief granted or refused.

Issue for consideration

Whether the criminal proceedings against the applicant, who was allegedly a minor (about 14 years of age) at the time of the occurrence and whose alleged offence was of a petty nature, are impermissible because the trial court failed to refer the matter to the juvenile justice board and instead sent him to judicial custody. +1 more

Court's answer

On considering the submissions, the court found it apparent that the applicant was minor, being 14 years of age at the time of the occurrence, that the allegation was of a petty matter, and that the matter had not been referred to the juvenile justice board; the matter was accordingly found to require thorough consideration, and notice was issued to opposite party no. 2 with counter affidavit within three weeks and rejoinder affidavit within a week thereafter. No final determination on the issues was made.

Ratio / Principle

As an interim measure, till the next date of listing, criminal proceedings in Criminal Case No. 1834/2025 (arising out of Case Crime No. 310/2008, Sections 457/380/411 IPC, P.S. Karaudi Kala, District Sultanpur) were stayed so far as the present applicant is concerned, subject to steps for service being taken within a week.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Lucknow Bench), Shree Prakash Singh, J. — Application U/S 482 No. 4246 of 2026, Vivek Kumar Mishra @ Ashish Kumar Mishra v. State of U.P. (decided 20.05.2026). The applicant, arraigned in Criminal Case No. 1834/2025 (The State of Uttar Pradesh Versus Vivek Kumar) arising out of Case Crime No. 310/2008 under Sections 457, 380 and 411 IPC, P.S. Karaudi Kala, District Sultanpur, sought setting-aside of the summoning order dated 04.10.2008 and the bailable-warrant orders dated 07.01.2026 and 01.04.2026 passed by Addl. Civil Judge/Addl Chief Judicial Magistrate 3rd, Court No.36, District Sultanpur, contending that he was a minor (about 14 years of age) at the time of the incident, that the allegation was of a petty matter, and that the trial court acted impermissibly in sending him to judicial custody instead of referring the matter to the juvenile justice board; he further prayed for an enquiry under section 9 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Act) [sic, as printed] and referral to the Juvenile Justice Board, and for quashing of the whole proceedings. The State opposed. Finding that the applicant was minor at the time of occurrence, the allegation petty, and the matter not referred to the juvenile justice board, the court held the matter to require thorough consideration: notice was issued to opposite party no. 2 (counter affidavit three weeks; rejoinder one week thereafter) and, till the next date of listing, the criminal proceedings were stayed so far as the present applicant is concerned. INTERIM-STAGE ORDER: no final adjudication on juvenility, referral, or quashing; the interim stay subsists only till the next date of listing.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 4246 of 2026

Vivek Kumar Mishra @ Ashish Kumar Mishra

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home And Another	Deptt. Lko. .....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Counsel for Opposite Party(s) :	Rama Pati Shukla, Swati Pandey G.A.

Court No. - 16

HON'BLE SHREE PRAKASH SINGH, J.

Heard Ms. Swati Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record.

Instant application has been filed with following main prayers:-

"to allow the petition, setting-aside the summoning order dated 04.10.2008 and order dated 07/01/2026 and 01.04.2026 whereby the bailable warrant has been issued passed by Addl. Civil Judge / Addl Chief Judicial Magistrate 3rd, Court No.36, District- Sultanpur in Criminal Case (No. 1834 /2025, The State of Uttar Pradesh Versus Vivek Kumar) arising out of Case Crime No. 310/2008, under Section- 457, 380 and 411 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 registered in P.S. Karaudi Kala, DistrictSultanpur, contained in ANNEXURE No.01 and 02 to the petition respectively pending before Addl. Civil Judge (Sr. Division)/ Addl Chief Judicial Magistrate 3rd Court No.36, District- Sultanpur.

It is further prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to stay the further proceedings of Criminal Case (No. 1834/2025, The State of Uttar Pradesh Versus Vivek Kumar), pending before Addl. Civil Judge (Sr. Division)/ Addl Chief Judicial Magistrate 3rd Court No.36, District- Sultanpur.

It is further prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to direct the learned Magistrate to make enquiry envisaged under section -09 of Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Act) and refer the case before Juvenile Justice Board for further Action in accordance with law."

The submission of learned counsel appearing for the applicant is that the applicant was a minor/juvenile delinquent, at the time of the incident. He

A482 No. 4246 of 2026

2

submitted that once the applicant was produced before the trial court, the trial court, instead of referring the matter to the juvenile justice board has sent the applicant to judicial custody, which is impermissible under the law. He submitted that for the petty matter, the present first information report has been lodged against the applicant, who was about 14 years of age the then. He argued that the trial which is proceeding before the magistrate is impermissible and the matter should have been referred to the juvenile justice board, therefore, submission is that the whole proceedings in the eyes of the law, thus, the same may be quashed.

Learned counsel appearing for the State has opposed the contentions aforesaid.

Upon considering the submissions of counsel for the parties, it is apparent from the statement of counsel for the applicant that the applicant is minor, being 14 years of age at the time of the occurrence. The allegation is of petty matter. The matter has not been referred to the juvenile justice board.

Matter requires thorough consideration.

Let notice be issued to opposite party no. 2, returnable at an early date.

Steps be taken within a week.

If steps are taken, office shall proceed accordingly.

Let counter affidavit be filed by the opposite parties, within period of three weeks. A week thereafter, is given to counsel for the applicant for filing rejoinder affidavit.

List thereafter.

Till the next date of listing, criminal proceedings of Criminal Case (No. 1834 /2025 arising out of Case Crime No. 310/2008, under Section- 457, 380 and 411 of IPC at P.S. Karaudi Kala, District-Sultanpur, shall remain stayed, so far as the present applicant is concerned.

May 20, 2026

Mayank

(Shree Prakash Singh,J.)

Digitally signed by :- MAYANK PRATAP SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench