Allahabad High Court

GULZAR AHMADversusSHRI GANESH PRASAD SAHA, SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE

Decided: 22 September 2026
Bench: VIKAS BUDHWAR

Holding

The High Court held that the order of the writ court had been substantially complied with and therefore dismissed the contempt application.

Summary

The applicant, Gulzar Ahmad, filed a contempt application alleging that the Superintendent of Police, Ganesh Prasad Saha, willfully defied the High Court's order dated 20 May 2025 in Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 10252 of 2025, which directed the petitioner to move a fresh representation before the Senior Superintendent of Police within three weeks. The court examined the instructions and a copy of the order dated 2 September 2006 that decided the applicant's representation. It found that the petitioner had substantially complied with the court’s directive. Consequently, the contempt application was consigned to the record, effectively dismissing it. The court also directed that a copy of the instructions be served on the applicant’s counsel and marked the instructions as Appendix ‘A’.

Issues considered

Whether the respondent’s conduct amounts to willful defiance of the High Court’s order dated 20 May 2025, thereby attracting contempt proceedings.
Whether the petitioner has substantially complied with the court’s directive to move a fresh representation before the Senior Superintendent of Police.

Subjects

contempt of court
willful defiance
compliance with court order
writ petition
U.P. Police Regulations
history sheet

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 5207 of 2026

Gulzar Ahmad
.....Applicant(s)
Versus

Shri Ganesh Prasad Saha, Superintendent Of Police
.....Opposite
Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Anurag Dubey, Jai Shukla
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) :

Court No. - 53
HON'BLE VIKAS BUDHWAR, J.

1. The present contempt application has been preferred alleging willful
defiance of the order dated 20.05.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Writ
Petition No. 10252 of 2025, order whereof is quoted herein under:-

"1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri G.P. Singh, learned AGA-1 for
State respondents.
2. Present writ petition has been preferred for quashing the History Sheet in
Category-A opened against the petitioner at P.S. Bhongaon, Distt. Mainpuri.
3. This much is contended that the petitioner does not come under the criteria
prescribed under Regulation 228 of the U.P. Police Regulations and as such the
impugned history sheet is liable to be set aside. It is also submitted that in similar
circumstances this Court has accorded indulgence vide order dated 7.2.2024 in
Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No.3355 of 2021 (Faisal @ Vaish Siddiqui v. State of
U.P. & Ors.) and the petitioner being on similar footing is also entitled for similar
indulgence. Reliance has also been placed on the judgment dated 4.3.2024 passed by
the Division Bench of this Court in Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No.9074 of 2022
(Aftab Alam v. State of U.P. & Ors.).
4. Learned AGA-1 for the State-respondents very fairly conceded the fact that in case
petitioner moves a fresh application at the earliest before the Competent Authority,
definitely the same would be considered expeditiously.
5. In the facts and circumstances of the case, no useful purpose would be served in
keeping the writ petition pending consideration. The writ petition stands disposed of
asking the petitioner to move a fresh representation ventilating his grievance before
the Senior Superintendent of Police, Mainpuri. In case any such representation is
moved by the petitioner within three weeks, we hope and trust that the said
representation would be considered on merit by the Competent Authority, who must
accord audience to the parties having stake in the matter and only thereafter decide
the said representation expeditiously, preferably within three months. Suffice to
indicate that the Court has not adverted on the merits of the case."
CAPL No. 5207 of 2026
2

2. Today instructions have been produced annexing therewith, the copy of
the order dated 02.09.2006 deciding the representation of the applicant.

3. Since the order of the Writ-Court has been substantially complied with,
the contempt application is consigned to record, leaving it open for the
applicant to question the same before appropriate forum.

4. Let a copy of the instructions be served upon the counsel for the applicant.

5. Instructions filed today are taken on record and marked as Appendix 'A'.

September 23, 2026
N.S.Rathour

(Vikas Budhwar,J.)

Digitally signed by :-
NIPENDRA SINGH RATHOUR
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…