HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 27895 of 2025 Dharmendra Alias Jatalli .....Petitioner(s)

Versus State of U.P. and Another .....Respondent(s)

Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Divyanshu Pathak, Swarnima Shukla Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A.

Court No. - 47 HON'BLE RAJEEV MISRA, J.

HON'BLE LAKSHMI KANT SHUKLA, J.

1. Heard Mr. Divyanshu Pathak, the learned counsel for petitioner and the learned AGA representing State-respondents 1 and 2.

2. Perused the FIR.

3. At the very outset the learned counsel for petitioner fairly submits that due to inadvertence, the first informant Sub Inspector Vijay Kumar P.S. Highway, District Mathura could not be impleaded as party respondent/respondent 3 in present Criminal Misc. Writ Petition. It is further contended by the learned counsel for petitioner that in a writ petition challenging arrest, the first informant is a necessary and proper party. In the absence of the first informant as party respondent in a writ petition challenging an arrest, the writ petition shall be bad for non joinder of necessary and proper party.

4. On the above premise the learned counsel for petitioner thus submits that he be permitted to amend t