Aman Kumar Singh Urf Mikki v. State Of U.P. And 3 Others

Heard Sri Daya Shankar Mishra, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri Chandrakesh Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner; Sri Vivek Shandilya, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri Vaibhav Shandilya, learned counsel for the informant; learned AGA for State-respondents and perused the material on record.

This habeas corpus writ petition has been filed by learned counsel for the petitioner praying for declaring the arrest of the petitioner in Case Crime No. 179 of 2025, under Sections 191(2), 103(1) 352, 351(2), 61(2)(a) B.N.S., Police Station Kotwali Konch, District Jalaun at Orai and prayer is also made for setting aside the order dated 6.9.2026 and subsequent orders, if any.

Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner has pointed out to the arrest memo prepared by the Investigating Officer of this Case, respondent no.4 and has pointed out that the arrest memo is not in accordance with the circular dated 3.7.2025 and 3.2.2026 issued by the Director General of Police and some columns of ground of arrest are left blank by the Investigating Officer. He has relied upon the judgement and order passed by this Court in the case of Umang Rastogi and Another Vs. State of 2 HABC No. 235 of 2026 U.P. and three others, passed in Habeas Corpus Writ Petition No.35 of

Learned Senior Counsel for the informant and learned AGA for State- respondents have opposed the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner, but could not dispute the aforesaid facts.

After considering the above arguments and judgement relied by the learned counsel for the petitioner, we are of the view that the arrest of petitioner and the remand order passed by the Magistrate dated 6.9.2025 are illegal. This Apex Court in Gautam Navlakha Vs. N.Ι.Α., (2022) 13 SCC 542 has held that a writ of habeas corpus is maintainable where the remand is absolutely illegal or passed mechanically.

The aforesaid remand order and arrest memo prepared by the respondent no.4 dated 6.9.2025 are hereby quashed.

Petitioner is directed to be released from custody forthwith without waiting for supply of the certified copy of this order.

Office is directed to issue certified copy of this order to the petitioner on payment of usual charges. 9 Keeping in view of the judgment of this Court in the case of Umang Rastogi (supra), the Senior Superintendent of Police, District Jalaun at Orai, respondent no.3, is directed to initiate disciplinary proceeding against the Investigating Officer of this case and submit compliance affidavit before this Court on or before 25.3.2026.

The Remand Magistrate/ Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jalaun at Orai, is also directed to submit explanation whether the judgment of this Court relied upon in this order is required to be complied by the Remand Magistrate or not. If it was required to be complied why it was not complied and remand order was passed without application of mind. The explanation of the Remand Magistrate shall also reach this Court by on or before 25.3.2026.

The Registrar (Compliance) of this Court is directed to communicate this order to the police official and the Remand Magistrate aforesaid and 3 HABC No. 235 of 2026 District Judge, Jalaun at Orai, within 24 hours.

List this case on 25.3.2026 as a fresh case. March 12, 2026 Ruchi Agrahari (Jai Krishna Upadhyay,J.) (Siddharth,J.)