PUCL welcomes the decision of the Surajpur Court to reject the UP government’s plea to drop all charges against the accused in the Mohammed Akhlaq lynching case
On 23rd December, 2025, a fast-tracked court in Surajpur, Uttar Pradesh rejected the state government’s plea to drop all charges against the accused in the Mohammed Akhlaq lynching case on the basis that ‘the offence of murder is a grave offence committed against society.’
Nearly 10 years have passed since 52-year-old Mohammed Akhlaq and his son were dragged out of their house in Dadri, Uttar Pradesh and lynched by a Hindutva mob. The lynching had taken place based on accusations of beef consumption broadcasted from a temple’s loudspeaker. While Mohammed Akhlaq was killed, his son suffered grievous injuries. The case against the accused invoked charges of murder and the police recovered five sticks, rods, and bricks as evidence.
On 10th October, 2025, the Public Prosecutor filed the application (under Sec. 321 CrPC) seeking withdrawal of charges against the accused. PUCL welcomes the decision of the trial court to reject this plea and its direction to list the case for hearing on a day-to-day basis. The reasoning of the Trial Court draws upon the well established principle of criminal jurisprudence that, “the offence of murder is a grave offence committed against society. For this reason, the State prosecutes such cases so that fear of the rule of law is maintained in society. The principle of criminal jurisprudence has been established for the larger welfare of society.”
The trial court through its order has underscored the importance of a commitment to rule of law. Murder cannot be excused and there must be justice for such a heinous offence. The PUCL welcomes the order of the trial court for it shows fidelity to the rule law as well as the Constitution. The trial court has through its order reaffirmed that nobody should be denied the constitutional promise of justice.
The lynching of Akhlaq and his son is a stain on the constitutional fabric. In the long struggle for justice, the order of the Trial court, reaffirms the faith in the impartiality of the legal system and takes the struggle for justice one step ahead. One hopes that the trial is speedily concluded and the perpetrators of this communally motivated crime are served their just deserts.
Kavita Srivastava, President, PUCL
V. Suresh, General Secretary, PUCL