Dismissed¶21

Dhruv Dhawan @ Dhuv Dhawan v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC12 May 2026CRLP/8508/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Dhruv Dhawan @ Dhuv Dhawan v. State Of U.P. And 3 Others, CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 8508 of 2026, High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Court No. 47, decided May 12, 2026 (J.J. Munir and Tarun Saxena, JJ.). Refusal to interfere with impugned FIR under Article 226 of the Constitution; FIR alleging pitched battle in a public place with illicit firearms and escape of perpetrators; writ petition dismissed. Counsel: Amit Kumar Pandey for petitioner; G.A. for respondents.

What did the court decide?

The Court cannot interfere in an FIR of the present kind or lend its process to be abused; the petitioner's conduct, prima facie, does not entitle him to relief in the exercise of jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution, notwithstanding the persuasive arguments of his counsel. ¶20

Dhruv Dhawan @ Dhuv Dhawan vs State of U.P. and 3… — Writ and Judicial Review | Allahabad HC (2026)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 8508 of 2026

¶3

Dhruv Dhawan @ Dhuv Dhawan

¶4

.....Petitioner(s)

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of U.P. And 3 Others

¶7

.....Respondent(s)

¶8

Counsel for Petitioner(s)	: Amit Kumar Pandey
Counsel for Respondent(s)	: G.A.

¶9

Court No. - 47

¶10

HON'BLE J.J. MUNIR, J. HON'BLE TARUN SAXENA, J.

¶11

This matter was mentioned in the morning indicating an urgency to be taken up. It is accordingly taken up.

¶12

A supplementary affidavit has been filed today in Court, is taken on record. Let it be numbered by the Office.

¶13

A perusal of the impugned FIR shows that it is a case which is an exemplar of the contemporary culture in youth that has come by where there is no fear of the Society, no fear of Law Enforcement Agencies and no fear of any Authority in the minds of citizens.

¶14

It is a case, where a pitched battle was being fought in a public place with illicit firearms and there was pandemonium all around. The Police intervened in the matter and brought the situation under control.

¶15

The perpetrators, who are named in the FIR, cocking a snook at the Police, made good their escape using powerful motor vehicles that they had in their possession along with the illicit arms that they were weilding. One of the accused, who was a party to the assault, sustained grievous injury but was carried away by his comrades obviating both medical aid and arrest on the spot.

¶16

From the tenor of FIR, we notice that the Police party were in slender numbers and not prepared to match almost an army of miscreants.

¶17

We are of clear opinion that notwithstanding the very persuasive arguments

¶18

CRLP No. 8508 of 2026

¶19

¶20

advanced by Mr. Amit Kumar Pandey, learned Counsel for the petitioner, we cannot interfere in an FIR of the present kind and lend our process to be abused by those whose conduct, prima facie , certainly does not entitle them to relief in the exercise of our jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution.

¶21

The writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed.

¶22

(Tarun Saxena,J.) (J.J. Munir,J.)

¶23

May 12, 2026

¶24

C. MANI/ Prashant

¶25

Digitally signed by :- CHANDRAMANI VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Dhruv Dhawan @ Dhuv Dhawan v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dhruv Dhawan @ Dhuv Dhawan v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Arun Pandey and 2 Others vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Neha and 3 Others vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Satyam Giri and 3 Others vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Juber Khan vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Sagar vs State of Uttar Pradesh and 2 Others

Meera Patel and 2 Others vs State of U.P. and 3 Others