The Allahabad High Court has taken serious note of the police not adding ‘Honourable’ and ‘Mr’ before the name of BJP MP Anurag Thakur while mentioning him as a Union Minister in a First Information Report (FIR) lodged in December last year in Mathura district. The court has directed UP Additional Chief Secretary, Home Department, to file an affidavit explaining the reason behind not abiding by the protocol by inserting the honourifics.

Thakur was a minister of sports, youth affairs, and Information and Broadcasting in the second Modi government.

A Division Bench of Justices J J Munir and Tarun Saxena issued the direction on March 31 while hearing a writ petition seeking relief in a case lodged against the petitioner and two others at the Highway police station of Mathura district on December 21 last year.

The former minister’s name has been mentioned in the FIR by complainant Khajan Singh while accusing main petitioner Harshit Sharma of collecting Rs 80 lakh from him, his relatives, and friends under the pretext of providing jobs in the government departments and the ministry, claiming his close connections with the then union minister Anurag Thakur.

As he failed to provide the job, Singh claimed that he took Sharma to Anurag Thakur in Delhi, where the latter reprimanded him for misusing his name without having any acquaintance, Singh stated in the FIR.

He further stated that Thakur made it sure that Sharma was apprehended by the officers of South Ex police station. He was released from police custody after he promised Singh that he would return the money soon. He handed over his Fortuner SUV (UP52 BD 7799) as a guarantee, the complainant stated in the FIR.

He alleged that Sharma later engaged local criminals Rahul Sharma and Chintu Chaudhary to steal the SUV. On December 17, the duo tried to steal the SUV from outside his house, but both were caught and handed over to the local police. However, both were released without any action, he alleged.

While hearing the petition, the division bench expressed serious concern over mentioning the name of Anurag Thakur as a union minister in the FIR, without giving due regard.

The bench directed, “The Additional Chief Secretary, (Home), Government of UP, Lucknow, will explain on his affidavit why in the FIR the Hon’ble Union Minister, whose name figures, has not been described with the usual honorific of Hon’ble, and at one point, referred to just by his name without even appending a ‘Mr.'”

The court observed, “Even if in the written report, the Hon’ble Minister was inappropriately described by the first informant, while writing the check FIR, it was the duty of the Police to have abided by the protocol by inserting the honorific, maybe in brackets.”

The court also directed the Additional Government Advocate to seek instructions and inform the court as to who is the registered owner of the Fortuner SUV, bearing registration no. UP52-BD-7799, which the complainant has in his possession, as he says, and was given to him by the first petitioner.

Listing the matter to be heard on April 6, the division bench directed, “Let this order be communicated to the Additional Chief Secretary, (Home), Government of U.P., Lucknow, and the Senior Superintendent of Police, Mathura, through the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mathura, by the Registrar (Compliance) within 48 hours.”