Sign in

Cow slaughter case in UP: HC questions FIR credibility, says it reads like film script

Lucknow bench of Allahabad high court seeks a personal affidavit from Bahraich superintendent of police within two weeks

Updated on: Feb 22, 2026, 22:06:43 IST
By , Lucknow
Share
Share via
  • facebook
  • twitter
  • linkedin
  • whatsapp
Copy link
  • copy link

The Lucknow bench of the Allahabad high court has questioned the credibility of an FIR in a cow slaughter case, observing that it reads more like a “movie script” than a genuine criminal complaint. The court also sought a personal affidavit from the Bahraich superintendent of police within two weeks to explain the inconsistencies apparent in the FIR.

The Lucknow bench of the Allahabad high court passed the order on February 16. (FILE PHOTO)
The Lucknow bench of the Allahabad high court passed the order on February 16. (FILE PHOTO)

A division bench of Justice Abdul Moin and Justice Babita Rani passed the order on February 16 on Akbar Ali’s petition challenging the FIR dated January 22 registered at the Jarwal Road police station in Bahraich.

The matter has been listed for March 16. The court further directed that if the personal affidavit is not filed, the SP shall appear in person with the records at the next hearing.

Till then, the court has ordered that no coercive action shall be taken against the petitioner.

Also read | UP court sentences 25 to 7 years' imprisonment in 2005 Bulandshahr cow slaughter case

According to the FIR, the incident occurred at 10.45am. The prosecution claimed police received a tip-off about the alleged slaughter of cow progeny and the accused attempting to dispose of the meat. On reaching the spot, the police allegedly heard voices saying “Ujala hone wala hai” — that dawn was about to break.

The FIR further claimed that the police surrounded the accused and warned them to surrender. The accused allegedly exhorted one another to shoot the police personnel.

The police allegedly opened fire; one of the accused reportedly shouted that he had been shot, three persons were apprehended and one fled. The arrested individuals purportedly named the petitioner as being involved in the offence.

The court noted that if the incident took place at 10.45am, it was inexplicable how the accused could be heard saying that dawn was about to break. This “blatant incongruity,” the court observed, reflected a patent abuse of law and rendered the FIR susceptible to being quashed.

The court also remarked that the language in the FIR appeared cinematic, including phrases akin to popular movie dialogues, such as police asking the accused to surrender and the accused dramatically shouting upon being shot. The court was referring to statements “Tum log police se ghir chuke ho, Aatmsamarpan kar do” and the accused persons yelling “hai goli lag gai” etc.

The court said that such fanciful and exaggerated drafting did not reflect ground realities and seemed heavily borrowed from film scripts.