Dhirendra Pratap Singh vs State of U.P. and 4 Others — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Dhirendra Pratap Singh vs State of U.P. and 4 Others — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Petition disposed with liberty to the petitioner to file a representation with a certified copy of the order before respondent No.3, Superintendent of Police, District Basti, within one month; respondent No.3 to consider and decide it within one month of receipt in light of the guidelines in Writ-C No.718 of 2025 (Anil Kumar v. State of U.P.). Reliefs A (quashing of RTI report) and B (mandamus for character certificate) were not granted; no merits adjudicated.

Issue for consideration

Whether a writ of mandamus should issue directing issuance of a character certificate to the petitioner (relief B), whose application dated 17.05.2025 was not acted upon on the ground of his criminal history. +2 more

Court's answer

Without adverting into the merits, the writ petition is disposed of permitting the petitioner to file a representation alongwith a certified copy of the order, raising all his grievances, before respondent No.3, Superintendent of Police, District Basti, within one month.

Ratio / Principle

If such a representation is filed, respondent No.3 shall consider and decide it in light of the guidelines laid down by this Court in the bunch of writ petitions led by Writ-C No.718 of 2025 (Anil Kumar v. State of U.P.), within one month from the date he receives the representation.

Key takeaways

The disposal was made considering the facts and circumstances of the case and without adverting into the merits; no adjudication on the merits of the character-certificate claim or the impugned RTI report was made.ratio¶¶18

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Saral Srivastava and Sudhanshu Chauhan, JJ.) disposed of a writ petition (WRIT-C No. 40263 of 2025, decided November 18, 2025) filed by Dhirendra Pratap Singh seeking certiorari to quash a report dated 26.09.2025 issued by respondent No. 4 under the R.T.I. Act, mandamus for issuance of a character certificate withheld on the ground of the petitioner's criminal history, and a direction to decide his representation dated 03.11.2025. Without adverting into the merits, and on the Standing Counsel's submission that no useful purpose would be served in keeping the petition pending, the Court permitted the petitioner to file a representation with a certified copy of the order before respondent No.3, Superintendent of Police, District Basti, within one month, to be considered and decided within one month of receipt in light of the guidelines laid down in Writ-C No.718 of 2025 (Anil Kumar v. State of U.P.).

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

WRIT - C No. - 40263 of 2025

Dhirendra Pratap Singh

.....Petitioner(s)

Versus

State Of U.P. And 4 Others .....Respondent(s) Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Dinesh Kumar, Jay Singh Yadav Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C.

Court No. - 40

HON'BLE SARAL SRIVASTAVA, J. HON'BLE SUDHANSHU CHAUHAN, J.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the State respondents.

By means of the present writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs:

"A. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quash the impugned report dated 26.09.2025 issued by the respondent no. 4 given answering under R.T.I. Act on 26.09.2025.

B. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the District Magistrate, District Basti i.e. respondent no. 2 to issue a Character Certificate to the petitioner, forthwith.

C. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent no. 3 to decide the representation dated 03.11.2025 given by petitioner sent by registered post, forthwith."

It is stated that the petitioner has submitted an application for issuing his character certificate before the respondent no. 3 on 17.05.2025. However, the respondent authority has not issued the said character certificate on the ground that the petitioner has a criminal history.

Learned Standing Counsel submits that no useful purpose would be served in keeping the writ petition pending and appropriate direction may be issued to the respondent No.3 to consider the grievance of the petitioner.

WRIC No. 40263 of 2025

2

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and without adverting into the merits of the case, the writ petition is disposed off permitting the petitioner to file a representation alongwith certified copy of this order raising all his grievances before the respondent No.3-Superintendent of Police, District Basti, within a period of one month from today. In case, any such representation is filed by the petitioner, the respondent No.3 shall consider and decide the same in light of the guidelines laid down by this Court in bunch of writ petitions leading of which is Writ-C No.718 of 2025 (Anil Kumar Vs. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko. & Others) within a period of one month thereafter from the date he receives the representation.

(Sudhanshu Chauhan,J.) (Saral Srivastava,J.)

November 18, 2025 Arif

Digitally signed by :- MOHAMMAD ARIF High Court of Judicature at Allahabad