HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW WRIT - C No. - 9116 of 2025 Court No. - 2 HON'BLE MRS. SANGEETA CHANDRA, J. HON'BLE BRIJ RAJ SINGH, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel, who appears for the State-opposite parties and perused the record. 2. This writ petition has been filed by petitioner with following main prayer(s): "(i) Issue a Writ Order or direction in the nature of Certiorari, quashing the impugned Office Order dated 23.07.2025 (Annexure No. 1) and the impugned Press Accreditation Committee Report dated 24.07.2024 (Annexure No. 2), passed by Opposite Parties Nos. 2 & 3 respectively, as annexed to the instant Writ Petition. (ii) Issue a Writ Order or direction in the nature of Certiorari, quashing the impugned Enquiry and Intelligence Recommendatory (confidential) L.I.U. Report dated 23.09.2023 (Annexure No. 3) submitted by Opposite Party No. 4 to the Opposite Party No. 2 as annexed to the instant Writ Petition. (iii) Issue a Writ, Order or direction in the nature of Mandamus, commanding the Opposite Party No. 2 to restore the Accreditation of the Petitioner as a State Accredited Freelance Journalist forthwith having regard to the ratio laid down in Prem Shankar Mani Tripathi Vs. State of U.P. and 3 others in Writ C No. 12792 of 2024, Judgment dated Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Pramod Kumar Shukla, Anil Srivastava, Arvind Kumar Tewari Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Dr. Mohammad. Kamran .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru Prin.Secy. Information And Public Relations Deptt. Lucknow And Ors. .....Respondent(s) 22.04.2024 (Annexure No. 28) and in the matter of Mohd. Kateel Sheikh Vs. State of U.P. in Writ (M/B) No. 24160 of 2020, Judgment dated 16.12.2020 (Annexure No. 30)." 3. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner was earlier given Accreditation on the basis of guidelines for grant of Accreditation to Journalist and the Government vide Government Order dated 31.05.2008 had constituted Accreditation Committee, which worked on the basis of guidelines of 2008 later on modified vide Government Orders dated 04.07.2008 and 16.06.2009. The petitioner was working as State Accredited Journalist for about 25 years, but then he resigned from the Company, where he was working with as he wished to join LLB course and worked as an Advocate. When he finished the LLB course and registered as an Advocate, he filed an application for being recognized as State Accredited Freelance Journalist and he was given such accreditation and has been performing his professional duties honestly, but the Director, Information and Public Relations passed an order dated 11.12.2023 cancelling his application for accreditation without looking into the guidelines of 2008. Feeling aggrieved by the same, the petitioner approached this Court by filing Writ-C No.11232 of 2023; Dr. Mohd. Kamran versus State of U.P. and another. It was argued before the Court that the petitioner was not heard before cancelling his accreditation. The Court being satisfied set aside the order dated 11.12.2023 only on the ground of denial of opportunity of hearing. The Court also left open to the Director, Information to place all the relevant information gathered by the Police Intelligence Unit before the Committee constituted under the Paragraph 5.1 of the Guidelines of 2008 and then the Committee was to consider the case of the petitioner and gave opportunity to the petitioner and pass appropriate and reasoned order thereafter. The Court had fixed 24.07.2024 for the petitioner to appear before the Committee. The petitioner appeared before the Committee on 24.07.2024 and after hearing him, the Committee gave Accreditation again to the petitioner, however, now by means of impugned order, the Director, Information has cancelled the Accreditation by referring to Case Crime No.48/2012, under Sections 420/467/468/471/120B/504/506/507 I.P.C. registered at Police Station Hazratganj, Lucknow and Case Crime WRIC No. 9116 of 2025 2 No.138/2021, under Sections 19/420/384/506 I.P.C. registered at Police Station Wazirganj, Lucknow. 4. It has also been submitted that in both the criminal cases, Final Report has been prepared and had opportunity been given to the petitioner to place this fact before opposite party nos.2 and 3, the decision of the Director would have been certainly different. 5. We direct the petitioner to represent his case to the Press Accreditation Committee again by filing a fresh representation giving details of Final Reports, if any, submitted in the first information reports lodged against him along with documentary proof within a week from today. 6. We also direct the petitioner to appear before the Press Accreditation Committee on 24.09.2025. The petitioner shall be heard and all material collected by the police against the petitioner shall also be placed before him for submitting his explanation to the same. The Press Accreditation Committee shall then take an appropriate decision and communicate the same to the Director, Information within a period of three weeks from the date of submission of reply by the petitioner and an appropriate order shall be passed within two weeks thereafter. 7. For a period of six weeks or till appropriate and reasoned decision is taken by the Director, Information, the impugned order dated 23.07.2025 Annexure No.1 to the writ petition shall be kept in abeyance. 8. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. September 16, 2025 Anupam S/- WRIC No. 9116 of 2025 3 (Brij Raj Singh,J.) (Mrs. Sangeeta Chandra,J.) Digitally signed by :- ANUPAM SINGH PATEL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench