Akhlaq Lynching Case: Widow Moves Allahabad High Court Against UP Government’s Decision to Withdraw Prosecution
By Rajesh Pandey
The wife of Mohammad Akhlaq, who was brutally lynched by a mob in Dadri, Greater Noida, in 2015 over allegations of consuming and storing beef, has approached the Allahabad High Court challenging the Uttar Pradesh government’s decision to withdraw the criminal case against the accused.
In her writ petition, Ikraman—Akhlaq’s widow has questioned the legality and constitutionality of a government order dated August 26, 2025, which approved the withdrawal of prosecution against those allegedly involved in her husband’s killing.
She has also challenged the subsequent withdrawal application filed by the public prosecutor before a trial court in Gautam Buddha Nagar, Noida.
The petition is expected to be taken up for hearing after the High Court reopens following its two-week winter vacation in January 2026.
Challenge to Executive Discretion and Political Influence
In the petition, Ikraman has urged the High Court to issue a writ directing the Uttar Pradesh Government to ensure that any discretionary exercise of executive power strictly conforms to the mandate of the Constitution of India.
She has further requested the court to prevent what she terms the misuse of executive authority to advance political agendas, warning that such actions undermine the rule of law and public confidence in the justice system.
Background of the Case
Mohammad Akhlaq was lynched in September 2015 in the Dadri area of Gautam Budh Nagar district after a mob accused him of eating beef during Eid and allegedly storing it for later consumption.
The incident sent shockwaves across the country and became a grim symbol of mob violence.
Initially, the police registered a First Information Report (FIR) under multiple provisions of the Indian Penal Code, including murder. In total, 18 accused were arrested, among them three juveniles.
One of the accused died in 2016, while the remaining 14 are currently out on bail.
Government’s Move to Withdraw the Case
Recently, the state government moved the district court in Gautam Budh Nagar seeking to withdraw the prosecution.
An application was filed by the Assistant District Government Counsel (Criminal) under Section 321 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), which allows the public prosecutor or assistant public prosecutor to withdraw from prosecution with the consent of the court.
Under Section 321 CrPC, the court’s approval is mandatory.
The court is required to independently assess whether such a withdrawal serves the interests of justice or whether it would lead to a miscarriage of justice.
The victim’s family has already filed a formal objection to the withdrawal application before the trial court, where the matter was listed for hearing on December 23.
Multiple Orders Under Challenge
Through the writ petition, Akhlaq’s wife has sought the setting aside of a series of government and administrative orders linked to the withdrawal decision, including:
- The Government Order dated August 26, 2025
- An administrative order dated September 10, 2025, issued by the Additional District Magistrate (Administration), Gautam Budh Nagar, to the Joint Director of Prosecution
- The prosecution order dated September 12, 2025, issued by the Joint Director of Prosecution
- The directive dated September 16, 2025, issued by the District Government Advocate
- The withdrawal application dated October 15, 2025, filed by the Assistant District Government Advocate (Criminal)
State’s Justification vs Victim’s Stand
The state government has justified its decision by arguing that withdrawal of the case would help restore communal harmony.
It has cited factors such as the absence of firearms during the attack, lack of prior enmity between the parties, and a controversial forensic report suggesting that the meat found in Akhlaq’s house was from a cow or its progeny.
The state has also noted that only one key witness statement has been recorded so far.
Countering this, the petitioner’s counsel has strongly opposed the move, quoting Martin Luther King Jr.: “Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.
” The counsel has argued that permitting withdrawals under political pressure would set a dangerous precedent, potentially emboldening mob violence and weakening the deterrent effect of criminal law.
Relief Sought
In this backdrop, Ikraman has urged the High Court to intervene decisively to ensure that executive discretion is exercised strictly within constitutional bounds and not misused to serve political interests.
The petition underscores the broader concern that withdrawing serious criminal prosecutions could erode accountability and normalize impunity in cases of mob lynching.
#AkhlaqLynching #DadriCase #AllahabadHighCourt #MobLynching #RuleOfLaw #CriminalJustice #ConstitutionOfIndia #JusticeForAkhlaq #Section321CrPC
