HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - C No. - 32670 of 2025 Court No. - 40 HON'BLE SARAL SRIVASTAVA, J. HON'BLE SUDHANSHU CHAUHAN, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for State-respondents. 2. The petitioner being aggrieved by order dated 21.08.2025 rejecting the issuance of the character certificate has approached this Court by means of the present writ petition. 3. Challenging the aforesaid order, learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that impugned order is cryptic and has been passed without application of mind inasmuch as it has failed to consider 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). Accordingly, it is submitted that impugned order cannot be sustained in law. 4. Per contra, learned Standing Counsel would contend that while rejecting the character certificate, cogent reason has been recorded by the competent authority, and therefore, there is no illegality in the impugned order. 5. Be that as it may, the impugned order dated 21.08.2025 is being reproduced herein below:- "अस्वीकृ त- थाना िरपोटर् के आधार पररिजस्टर नं0-8 व सीसीटीए नएस िरपोटर् के अवलोकन से आवेदक के िवरूद्ध थाना स्थानीय पर मु०अ०सं०-02/2021 धारा-323, 504 भा०द०िव० व 3 32va, 31 ६, ६ SC/ST Act का अिभयोग पंजीकृ त हैं। बाद िववेचना आरोप पत्र- 13/21 िदनांक 24.02.2021 को मा0 न्यायालय प्रेिषत िकया जा चुका है। चिरत्र अनुरोध की संस्तुित न हीं की जाती है। िजसके कारण आवेदन अस्वीकृ त िकया गया है 200825". Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Piyush Tripathi Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Ashok Yadav .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 2 Others .....Respondent(s) 6. From the order extracted above, it is evident that the impugned order has been passed without application of mind and non-speaking. This Court in the case of Anil Kumar (supra) has laid down the guidelines which has to be adhered by the competent authority before rejecting the character certificate. 7. In such view of the fact, the impugned order cannot be sustained, and is accordingly set aside. 8. The matter is remitted to the respondent No.2-Superintendent of Police, District Sonbhadra to consider the issuance of the character certificate to the petitioner in the light of the guidelines laid down by this Court in the case of Anil Kumar (supra) within a period of one month from the date of production of certified copy of this order. 9. Thus, for the reasons given above, the writ petition is allowed with no order as to costs. 10. It is made clear that if there is any concealment of fact by the petitioner in obtaining the present order, the respondents shall have the liberty to file recall application to recall the said order. October 8, 2025 SS WRIC No. 32670 of 2025 2 (Sudhanshu Chauhan,J.) (Saral Srivastava,J.) Digitally signed by :- SUNIL KUMAR SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad