'SC's 'Tehseen Poonawalla' Directives Binding On State & Centre; Can't Monitor Mob Lynching Incident In PIL': Allahabad HC

The Allahabad High Court recently disposed of a Criminal Public Interest Litigation (PIL) plea filed by Jamiat Ulema-i-Hind seeking compliance with the Supreme Court's guidelines laid down in Tehseen S. Poonawalla v. Union of India (2018), on preventing and addressing incidents of mob lynching and mob violence. A bench of Justice Siddharth and Justice Avnish Saxena observed that every incident of mob lynching/ mob violence is a separate incident, and it cannot be monitored in a public interest litigation. The division bench also added that it is always open for the aggrieved party to approach the government first before rushing to this court seeking compliance of the judgment of the Apex Court. "…the judgement of the Apex Court in the Tehseen S. Poonawalla (Supra) is binding upon the State Government as well as the Central Government. It is always open for the aggrieved party to approach the government first before rushing to this court seeking compliance of the judgement of Apex Court", the bench observed in its order passed on July 15. Briefly put, the PIL plea sought extensive directions concerning the implementation of the Supreme Court's binding guidelines in the case of 'Tehseen Poonawalla' (supra). The petition, filed through Advocates Syed Ali Murtaza, Seemab Qayyum and Raza Abbas, highlighted the alleged failure of the State Government in implementing the preventive, remedial, and punitive measures prescribed by the Supreme Court in its 2018 verdict. The PIL also referred to the specific incidents of mob lynching and mob violence in Uttar Pradesh, including a recent one [from May 2025] in Aligarh. Among the 12 reliefs sought were: Constitution of an SIT headed by an Inspector General-rank officer to investigate a recent mob violence incident in Aligarh;To file the notification and circular related to the appointment of nodal officers in each district dealing with mob lynching cases, along with a status report on such cases;Direct DGP to file a status report on criminal investigations of mob lynching incidents in the last five years;Specify notification regarding designation of special or fast-track courts for lynching/mob-violence cases and the current status of trials, in line with Para 40.17 of the SC judgment;Public awareness campaigns against mob lynching;Punitive measures against non-complying police officers;Preventive detention against lynching accused;₹15 lakh compensation to each victim of the May 24 Aligarh incident. More about the petition here : UP Govt Opposes Maintainability Of Jamiat Ulema-i-Hind's PIL In Allahabad HC For Enforcing SC Directives On Mob Lynching In State The Court noted that although the reliefs prayed were consistent with the Supreme Court's guidelines in Tehseen Poonawalla, they could not be granted through a PIL seeking general oversight over individual incidents. "Every incident of mob lynching/mob violence is a separate incident and it cannot be monitored in a public interest litigation", the Court said. The Court, however, noted that the affected parties have the liberty to first approach the appropriate government authority for the implementation of the Supreme Court directions. Case title - Jamiat Ulma E Hind (Arshad Madani) Public Trust And Another vs. Union Of India And 5 Others 2025 LiveLaw (AB) 265Case citation : 2025 LiveLaw (AB) 265Click here To Read/Download Order

'SC's 'Tehseen Poonawalla' Directives Binding On State & Centre; Can't Monitor Mob Lynching Incident In PIL': Allahabad HC

Sparsh Upadhyay

Tags