Mohan Prakash @ Mohan Mittal Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Mohan Prakash @ Mohan Mittal Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Writ petition disposed of finally; principal prayer (challenge to FIR) not pressed and refused; direction issued that if the petitioner appears before the Court below and applies for bail, the bail application be decided in the light of Satender Kumar Antil (2021) 10 SCC 773; interim order, if any, discharged.

Issue for consideration

Whether the criminal misc. writ petition challenging FIR dated 20.12.2025 (Case Crime No. 236 of 2025, Section 111(2)(b) BNS and Sections 3/7 of The Essential Commodities Act, Police Station Kheragarh, District-Agra) should be allowed. +1 more

Court's answer

The principal prayer in the writ petition (challenge to the FIR) was not pressed by the learned counsel for the petitioner and is refused by the Court.

Ratio / Principle

The writ petition is disposed of finally with a direction that in case the petitioner appears before the Court below and applies for bail, his bail application shall be decided by the Court concerned in the light of the law laid down by the Apex Court in Satender Kumar Antil (Supra).

Key takeaways

Interim order, if any, stands discharged.ratio¶18

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

A Division Bench of the Allahabad High Court disposed of a criminal misc. writ petition by Mohan Prakash @ Mohan Mittal challenging FIR dated 20.12.2025 (Case Crime No. 236 of 2025, under Section 111(2)(b) BNS and Sections 3/7 of The Essential Commodities Act, Police Station Kheragarh, District-Agra), lodged by first informant-respondent-4 Smt. Sumallika, a Supply Inspector. After arguments, counsel for the petitioner did not press the principal prayer and instead sought disposal with a direction to the jurisdictional Magistrate/Court to decide the petitioner's bail application in the light of Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another (2021) 10 SCC 773; the learned A.G.A. had no objection. The Court refused the principal prayer, disposed of the writ petition finally with a direction that if the petitioner appears before the Court below and applies for bail, the bail application shall be decided in the light of Satender Kumar Antil, and discharged any interim order. (Bench: Rajeev Misra and Lakshmi Kant Shukla, JJ.)

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 2052 of 2026

Mohan Prakash @ Mohan Mittal

.....Petitioner(s)

	Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others	.....Respo
Counsel for Petitioner(s)	: Mohammad Khalid
Counsel for Respondent(s)	: G.A.

.....Respondent(s)

Court No. - 47

HON'BLE RAJEEV MISRA, J. HON'BLE LAKSHMI KANT SHUKLA, J.

Heard Mr. Pawan Kumar Yadav, Advocate, holding brief of Mr. Mohammad Khalid, the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.G.A for the State-respondents-1 to 3.

2. Perused the record.

Petitioner-Mohan Prakash @ Mohan Mittal has approached this Court by means of present criminal misc. writ petition challenging the FIR dated 20.12.2025 lodged by first informant-respondent-4 Smt. Sumallika, Supply Inspector, Police Station-Kheragarh, District-Agra and registered as Case Crime No. 236 of 2025, under Section 111(2)(b) BNS and Sections 3/7 of The Essential Commodities Act, Police StationKheragarh, District-Agra.

After some arguments, the learned counsel for petitioner fairly submits that he does not wish to press the prayer prayed for by means of present writ petition. According to the learned counsel for petitioner, interest of justice shall better be served, in case, a direction is issued by this court to the Jurisdictional Magistrate/Court concerned to decide the bail application of petitioner in the light of law laid down by the Apex Court in Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another (2021) 10 SCC 773 . It is thus urged by the learned counsel for petitioner that present writ petition be disposed of in the light of above.

CRLP No. 2052 of 2026

2

Learned A.G.A. for State-respondents 1, 2 and 3 has no objection to the prayer made by the learned counsel for petitioner.

In view of above, the prayer prayed for by means of present writ petition is refused.

However, this writ petition is disposed of finally with a direction that in case, petitioner appears before Court below and applies for bail then his bail application shall be decided by Court concerned in the light of the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Satender Kumar Antil (Supra) .

Interim order, if any, stands discharged.

March 18, 2026

Vinay

(Lakshmi Kant Shukla,J.) (Rajeev Misra,J.)

Digitally signed by :- VINAY KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad