Sunil Kumar vs State Of U.P. And 4 Others
2025 Latest Caselaw 11326 ALL

Allahabad High Court

Sunil Kumar vs State Of U.P. And 4 Others on 9 October, 2025

Author: Arun Kumar

Bench: Arun Kumar

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 


Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:179736
 

 
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD 
 
WRIT - C No. - 35408 of 2025   
 
   Sunil Kumar    
 
  .....Petitioner(s)   
 
 Versus  
 
   State Of U.P. And 4 Others    
 
  .....Respondent(s)       
 
   
 
  
 
Counsel for Petitioner(s)   
 
:   
 
Murli Dhar Yadav, Prem Shankar Yadav   
 
  
 
Counsel for Respondent(s)   
 
:   
 
C.S.C.   
 
     
 
 Court No. - 9
 
   
 
 HON'BLE ARUN KUMAR, J.      

Heard Sri Prem Shankar Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the State respondents.

The present petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging the order of the respondent no. 2, dated 10.9.2025, rejecting his application for issuance of a character certificate on the ground that a criminal case is pending against him in Case Crime No. 168 of 2019, under Sections 323/427/506 IPC.

It is contended by the counsel for the petitioner that mere pendency of a criminal case under the aforesaid sections of IPC is not an impediment for issuance of the character certificate. In support of his argument he has relied upon Division Bench Judgement of this Court dated 28.5.2025, passed in Writ-C No. 718 of 2025 alongwith other connected petitions at the Lucknow Bench, in which it has been held that due to pendency of any criminal case the character certificate should not be rejected in fact it should be issued disclosing the material which is available against the petitioner i.e. the details of the criminal case, stage of proceeding, etc. The relevant portion of the aforesaid order is reproduced herein under:-

"2. On 26.05.2025 we had passed the following order in this bunch of writ petitions:-

"Heard Shri Lalit Kishore Tiwari, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Shri Manish Mishra, learned Standing Counsel for the State.

In response to our order dated 06.05.2025, Shri Manish Mishra, learned Standing Counsel says that a meeting was convened in the Home Department of Government of U.P. for considering the matter and in that process it was found that several other departments such as Revenue Department, Public Works Department, Excise Department etc., their opinion may be required, as such, a final decision could not be taken and some reasonable time has been sought.

The time prayed for is granted. We, however, find that such character certificates are required for various purposes such as business activity, obtaining license, employment etc.. On account of pendency of criminal cases, sometimes involving petty offences, the applications are rejected. The appropriate course in our opinion is to communicate the decision on a prescribed format mentioning the pendency of the criminal case, the offences alleged and the stage of proceedings, instead of expressing any opinion or saying, as is ordinarily done that ??Character cannot be certified.? and that certificate in the aforesaid format can be presented to the concerned department which can form its own opinion in the matter.

In some certificates, we have found that after mentioning pendency of criminal case or trial, even involving petty offences, a recital is added that for the said reason, the character of the person cannot be certified. Now, this is an omnibus recital, which is not correct. In other cases we have found that where application for issuance of character certificate is filed, say before the District Magistrate, that is in cases where licenses have been applied or some business activity such as contract etc. is to be entered into or carried on, at times, the application is rejected by the District Magistrate with reference to the pendency of criminal cases. Now, this in our view is again not correct. What should be done is to mention the material which is available against the petitioner i.e. the details of the criminal cases, stage of the proceedings etc., and provide it to the concerned department or the applicant. It will be for the concerned Department which is to provide employment or to grant license etc. to form an opinion on the basis of the recitals in the character certificate whether it should engage with the applicant or not. Say for example, a case against the petitioner under Section 323, 324 I.P.C. [under corresponding Section 115 & 118(1) of Bhartiya Nyaya Samhita, 2023] is pending investigation, it is a petty offence and merely on a one off incident, should the application be rejected or can it be said that the character of the person cannot be certified, specially where the case is only at the investigation stage. Of course, this will depend upon the requirement of the department which needs the N.O.C. from the applicant. Sometimes, offences carrying less sentence may have a serious impact on society or for the purposes of the activity or employment in the context of which character certificate is sought, but all this is for the concerned department to form an opinion based on the material mentioned in the character certificate, and not for the issuing authority to express any opinion as to how far the character is certifiable or not, except in exceptional cases where supposing a person is involved in cases under the N.D.P.S. Act or has been convicted therein or he may have a long criminal history or proceedings under the Gangsters Act has been filed or trial is proceeding etc..

We may in this context quote a character certificate given by the Senior Superintendent of Police, Ambedkar Nagar on 11.12.2024 which was filed in Writ C No. 4798 of 2025. In our opinion, the format on which the certificate was given is quite appropriate. It is as under:-

The Home Department may take it as a sample for its consideration in the next meeting. This certificate leaves it to the opinion of the employer or the Department concerned to take a decision as to whether in the facts and circumstances mentioned therein, the license or the business activity or the employment is to be given or not without expressing any opinion, as, mere pendency of a criminal case, specially involving a petty offence, may not necessarily reflect the entire character of the person in a given case. It is a subjective opinion which can be forward by the concerned department where license has been applied or appointment has been sought.

Till a decision is taken by the Government of U.P. as referred earlier, we are of the opinion that the Police Officials / District Magistrate should issue the certificates on the aforesaid format, subject however to the decision whatever may be taken by the State Government, unless there is some statutorily prescribed proforma in any statute for issuance of such character certificate. Whatever are the criminal cases pending against the applicant, they will be mentioned in character certificate and the stage of such proceedings, nothing more, unless there is any other material which may justify an opinion of the officer concerned, in that case, opinion can also be expressed.

It is Ordered accordingly.

At this stage, we are informed that in several cases the application for issuance of character certificate has been declined by cryptic order, while in other cases, it has been rejected on account of pendency of criminal cases, therefore, some relief be granted to them, as otherwise, their employment or business activity would be prejudiced. For consideration of this aspect, list/put up this case day after tomorrow i.e. 28.05.2025 as fresh. "

53. In this case police character verification report dated 18.04.2025 submitted by the Superintendent of Police, Amedkar Nagar is not favourable only on account of the pendency of a criminal case bearing Case Crime No. 137 of 2023 under Sections 504, 506, 323 IPC and charge has submitted on 22.08.2023, on account of which, character certificate has not been issued as the same has not been recommended.

54. Let a certificate be issued on the format referred hereinabove in the order dated 26.05.2025 and in terms thereof within a period of three weeks from the date a certified copy of this order is submitted."

In view of the aforesaid facts and the judgment relied upon by the counsel for the petitioner, the order of the respondent no. 2, dated 10.9.2025 is set aside. The respondent no. 2 is directed to reconsider the claim of the petitioner for issuance of character certificate in light of the judgment passed in Writ-C No. 718 of 2025, within a period of two months, from the date of presentation of a certified copy of this order.

With the above observations and directions, this writ petition stands allowed.

(Arun Kumar,J.)

October 9, 2025

Ranjeet Sahu