Dismissed¶10

Ajaj Khan v. State of Up and Another

Allahabad HC11 Feb 2026CRLR/797/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allahabad High Court, Criminal Revision No. 797 of 2026, Ajaj Khan v. State of U.P. and Another, Abdul Shahid, J., 11.02.2026: criminal revision against rejection of discharge application dismissed; no illegality or irregularity found in trial court order; F.I.R. under Ss. 420/467/468/471 I.P.C. and S. 12 Passport Act, 1967 against Mohd. Firoz Alam; charge sheet No. 252-A/2023 (25.04.2023) under Ss. 420/467/468/471/120B I.P.C., S. 12 Passport Act, 1967 and Ss. 3/5 U.P. Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, 2021; cognizance taken; bail already granted.

What did the court decide?

The Court held that there is no illegality or irregularity in the impugned order of the learned trial court rejecting the discharge application. ¶9

Ajaj Khan vs State of Up and Another — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2026)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 797 of 2026

Ajaj Khan

.....Revisionist(s)

Versus

State of U.P. and Another	.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Revisionist(s)	: Santosh Kumar Giri, Tazeen Fatma
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: G.A.
Court No.- 87

¶7

HON'BLE ABDUL SHAHID, J.

¶8

Heard learned counsel for the revisionist and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶9

Learned counsel for the revisionist submits that there is no evidence against the revisionist. His name has been included only on the basis of the confessional statement of the co-accused, and thereafter a charge sheet has been filed against him. There is no linking evidence against the revisionist. The F.I.R. was registered under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C. and Section 12 of the Passport Act, 1967 against the named accused, Mohd. Firoz Alam.

¶10

After detailed investigation, a charge sheet has been filed against the accused/revisionist/Ajaj Khan under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B I.P.C., Section 12 of the Passport Act, 1967, and Sections 3/5 of the Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, 2021, vide Charge Sheet No. 252-A/2023 dated 25.04.2023. Cognizance has already been taken by the learned trial court on the charge sheet. The applicant/revisionist has already been granted bail by this Court.

¶11

Learned counsel for the revisionist further submits that he is entitled to be discharged as he is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case by the accused Mohd. Firoz Alam as well as by the police personnel/first informant. There was no motive for him to commit the alleged offence. There is neither direct nor indirect involvement of the revisionist in the preparation of the forged documents in question by accused Mohd. Firoz Alam.

¶12

CRLR No. 797 of 2026

¶13

¶14

It is further submitted that accused Mohd. Firoz Alam applied for a passport and, in the passport application form, mentioned Alam Sher Khan as the first reference and Nafees Khan as the second reference, meaning thereby there is no reference to the revisionist. It is also submitted that Alam Sher Khan and Nafees Khan, whose references were used by accused Mohd. Firoz Alam for obtaining the passport, and another person allegedly involved in preparing the Aadhaar Card and opening an account in SBI Bank, have not been made accused; rather, only notice under Section 41(4) Cr.P.C. was issued to them. Both references have not been made accused in the said case. Whereas the present applicant has no concern with accused Mohd. Firoz Alam and, merely on the basis of a few lines in the statement of the main accused Mohd. Firoz Alam, he has been falsely implicated in this case.

¶15

There is no independent eyewitness or circumstantial evidence to connect the present applicant/revisionist with the alleged offence. It is submitted that initially the charge sheet was filed only against Mohd. Firoz Alam and further investigation was continued. During further investigation, after taking charge, the Investigating Officer of the Crime Branch, Atulya Kumar Pandey, commenced investigation. During the course of investigation, it was found that the owner of House No. 643 was acquainted with the main accused Mohd. Firoz Alam, who was residing in Nepal, and allegedly assisted him in preparing forged documents. It is further stated that the forged documents, i.e., voter list entry, ration card, and thereafter an SBI bank account, were prepared/opened at the address of House No. 643. However, House No. 643 is related to Lalloo and others and not to the present applicant. In this regard, parcha no. 29 was prepared on 01.04.2023.

¶16

On 06.04.2023, the Investigating Officer prepared parcha no. 30, wherein it is mentioned that he visited the Passport Office at Lucknow and investigated the matter; however, no evidence was collected against the present revisionist. There is no specific allegation against the revisionist.

¶17

Learned A.G.A. has submitted that the revisionist is involved in the said crime and his role cannot be discarded. The learned trial court has passed a detailed order after considering the evidence collected during the investigation. It has come on record that the previous Pradhan, Ajaj, had a close relationship with Firoz Alam. Upon the arrest of Firoz Alam, it came to light that Firoz and Ajaj, in collusion with each other, prepared forged documents. The statement of Mohd. Babloo, son of Salim Ahmad, recorded

¶18

CRLR No. 797 of 2026

¶19

¶20

under Section 161 Cr.P.C., is on record. Prima facie evidence is available against the revisionist/accused. At this stage, neither a mini-trial nor meticulous appreciation of evidence is permissible. All submissions made in the discharge application and written arguments were duly considered by the learned trial court while passing the impugned order.

¶21