Disposed¶19

Archit Ojha v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC16 Jan 2026WRIC/236/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Character Certificate; writ of mandamus; pendency of FIR not a bar; F.I.R. Case Crime No.947 of 2017; Sections 147, 323, 504, 506, 341 IPC; Police Station Piperpur; District Amethi; Superintendent of Police to mention criminal-case details in certificate; employer/agency to decide suitability; Anil Kumar Vs. State of U.P. and others; Writ-C No.718 of 2025; 2025:AHCLKO:32272-DB; four weeks; Allahabad High Court Lucknow Bench; WRIT-C No. 236 of 2026.

What did the court decide?

Mandamus in the nature of a direction to the Superintendent of Police, District Amethi to issue the Character Certificate to the petitioner, mentioning the pendency of the F.I.R., within four weeks from the date a copy of the order is produced before him. ¶19

Archit Ojha vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko. and 2 Others — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶19

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner is entitled to issuance of a Character Certificate notwithstanding the pendency of F.I.R. Case Crime No.947 of 2017 against him. +1 more

¶14

Court's answer

A direction is issued to the Superintendent of Police, District Amethi to issue the Character Certificate to the petitioner; pendency of the F.I.R. is not to operate as a bar to issuance.

¶19

Ratio / Principle

This Court agrees with the judgement in Anil Kumar (supra): where a criminal case is pending against a person, the Character Certificate issued by the Superintendent of Police should mention the details of such criminal case and leave it to the employer/agency to take an appropriate decision on suitability after application of mind.

¶18

Key takeaways

While issuing the Character Certificate, the Superintendent of Police shall mention the pendency of the F.I.R. therein, and the certificate is to be issued within four weeks from the date a copy of the order is produced before him.ratio¶19

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Lucknow Bench), WRIT-C No. 236 of 2026 (decided January 16, 2026; Shekhar B. Saraf and Manjive Shukla, JJ.). The petitioner sought a writ of mandamus commanding opposite party no.2 to issue a Character Certificate on his online application dated 07.12.2025, consideration whereof had been withheld owing to pendency of F.I.R. Case Crime No.947 of 2017 under Sections 147, 323, 504, 506 and 341 IPC, Police Station Piperpur, District Amethi. Following its coordinate-bench decision in Anil Kumar Vs. State of U.P. and others, Writ-C No.718 of 2025 (Neutral Citation No.-2025:AHCLKO:32272-DB), with which the Court expressed agreement, the Court proceeded on the view that pendency of a criminal case does not bar issuance of a Character Certificate: the certificate issued by the Superintendent of Police should mention the details/pendency of the criminal case, leaving the employer/agency to take an appropriate decision on the candidate's suitability after application of mind. The petition was disposed of with a direction to the Superintendent of Police, District Amethi to issue the Character Certificate mentioning the pendency of the F.I.R., within four weeks from production of a copy of the order.

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

WRIT - C No. - 236 of 2026

Archit Ojha

.....Petitioner(s)

Versus

State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko. And 2 Others

¶7

.....Respondent(s) Counsel for Petitioner(s) : D.P. Dutt Tiwari, Dharmendra Kumar Tiwari Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C.

¶8

Court No. - 3

¶9

HON'BLE SHEKHAR B. SARAF, J. HON'BLE MANJIVE SHUKLA, J.

¶10

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the State-opposite parties and perused the record.

¶11

This petition has been filed by the petitioner with the following main prayer:-

¶12

"Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding and directing the opposite party no.2 to issue Character Certificate to petitioner expeditiously on the online application of petitioner dated 07.12.2025, in light of observation of this Hon'ble Court in Writ-C No.718 of 2025: Anil Kumar Vs. State of U.P. and others, and connected matters, (Annexed as Annexure No.01 to the Writ Petition)."

¶13

It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the prayer of the petitioner for issuance of Character Certificate is not being considered on the ground that there is one F.I.R. bearing Case Crime No.947 of 2017, under Sections 147, 323, 504, 506 and 341 IPC, Police Station Piperpur, District- Amethi.

¶14

It has been submitted that lodging of F.I.R. cannot make the petitioner automatically guilty of any offence.

¶15

WRIC No. 236 of 2026

¶16

¶17

This Court in Writ-C No.718 of 2025: Anil Kumar Vs. State of U.P. and others , and connected matters; Neutral Citation No.-2025:AHCLKO:32272-DB, has observed that where there is a criminal case that is pending against a person, the Character Certificate issued by the Superintendent of Police should mention the details of such criminal case in the Character Certificate and leave it for the employer/agency to which the petitioner has applied to take an appropriate decision after application of mind regarding the suitability of the candidate/ applicant.

¶18

We have gone through the judgement, which has been rendered by this Court in the case of Anil Kumar (supra). We are in agreement with the same.

¶19

We, therefore, dispose of this petition with a direction to the Superintendent of Police, District Amethi to issue Character Certificate to the petitioner. The Superintendent of Police while issuing Character Certificate shall mention the pendency of F.I.R. Such certificate be issued within a period of four weeks from the date a copy of this order is produced before him.

¶20

(Manjive Shukla,J.) (Shekhar B. Saraf,J.)

¶21

January 16, 2026

¶22

Ashutosh

¶23

Digitally signed by :- ASHUTOSH PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Archit Ojha v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Archit Ojha v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Abhilasha Commercial Private Limited Thru. Authorized Representative,Mr.Vivek Srivastava vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Basic Education and 3 Others

M/S G.D.and Sons Thru.Proprietor Akhilesh Kumar Srivastava vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Tax and Registration Lko. and 2 Others

M/S Sai Laptop Technology Thru. Proprietor Vikash Kumar vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. State Tax Lko. and Another

Mridul Tripathi vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Energy Lko and 4 Others

Saroj Kumar and 8 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Lko. and 3 Others

Commissioner of Customs (Preventive), Lko. vs Avinash Kumar Dwivedi Alias Pandit