The Allahabad High Court (Lucknow Bench) has criticised a recurring pattern it says appears in several Uttar Pradesh Police FIRs. The Court said many complaints read “scripted”, “fanciful” and “highly exaggerated”, and often resemble “movie scripts”.
A Division Bench of Justice Abdul Moin and Justice Pramod Kumar Srivastava made the remarks while hearing a writ petition filed by Akbar Ali. The petition challenges an FIR that invokes attempt to murder under the BNS, along with allegations under the Arms Act and the U.P. Cow Slaughter Act.
Court flags contradictions in the FIR story
The Bench read the FIR and pointed to inconsistencies it called glaring. The Court said such contradictions can indicate a “patent abuse of law” by police authorities. It also noted that, on such facts, the FIR may even be quashed.
The FIR claims that police received a tip from a special informer (Mukhbir Khas) about alleged slaughter of cow progeny and a plan to dispose of meat.
The FIR records these timings:
- The FIR was lodged at 14:24 hours (2:24 p.m.) on January 22, 2026.
- The alleged incident took place at 10:45 hours (10:45 a.m.) the same day.
Despite the incident being shown as happening in broad daylight, the FIR states that police heard someone say: “Ujala hone wala hai” (it is about to be dawn). The Bench questioned how “dawn is still to break” at 10:45 a.m., as mentioned in the FIR.
“Movie dialogue” appears in the FIR
The Court also highlighted dialogue-like lines recorded in the FIR. It notes that police allegedly shouted:
“Tum log police se ghir chuke ho, Aatm Samarpan kar do” (You are surrounded by the police, surrender).
The FIR then attributes this response to the accused:
“Yeh…police wale hain, inko goli maro, bachkar nahin jaane chahiye” (These are police personnel, shoot them, they should not escape).
It also claims that when police fired, one person allegedly said: “Hai goli lag gai” (Oh, I have been shot).
The FIR further states that police caught three persons, while a fourth fled. The arrested persons allegedly named the petitioner as involved.
Bhajan Lal principles cited; SP must file affidavit
The Bench said courts must “step in” to curb “fanciful and highly exaggerated FIRs”. It described this case as a blatant example.
The Court referred to the Supreme Court ruling in State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal. It reiterated that a court may quash criminal proceedings under Article 226 when the FIR allegations look so absurd and inherently improbable that no prudent person would proceed on them.
Even so, the High Court did not quash the FIR at this stage. Instead, it directed the Superintendent of Police, District Bahraich, to file a personal affidavit answering the inconsistencies identified by the Court. The Court gave two weeks to file the affidavit.
The matter is listed for March 16. The Court also directed that if the affidavit is not filed, the SP must appear in person with the record to assist the Court.
Meanwhile, the Court has stayed coercive action against the petitioner in connection with the impugned FIR.
