The High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench, has granted interim protection from arrest to petitioner Mohammad Kaif in connection with a First Information Report (FIR) involving allegations of sexual relations based on a false promise of marriage. A division bench comprising Justice Rajnish Kumar and Justice Zafeer Ahmad issued the order on October 24, 2026, providing the petitioner temporary relief until the next scheduled hearing on November 4, 2026.

The case, registered as FIR number 0237 of 2026 at Police Station Aashiyana in Lucknow, invoked Sections 69 and 351(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The petitioner approached the court to challenge the legitimacy of the FIR, asserting that the allegations were entirely unfounded and designed to damage his professional reputation.

Contested Narratives and Legal Arguments

During the hearing, counsel for the petitioner, Advocate Nadeem Murtaza, argued that the complaint was built upon a "wrong and concocted story" and that no promise of marriage had ever been extended by the petitioner. The defense further emphasized that the complainant had initially raised these allegations during a podcast on a social media platform on April 29, 2026. The petitioner contended that such public disclosure by the complainant was motivated by ulterior motives rather than genuine grievance, and that the FIR served as a tool to malign his public standing.

In opposition, the legal representative for the complainant, respondent no. 4, maintained that the contents of the FIR sufficiently disclosed the commission of a cognizable offence under Section 69 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. The complainant’s counsel explicitly contested the claims made in paragraph 35 of the petition, where the petitioner had denied the existence of any marriage-related promises, stating that the veracity of the complaint should be tested through a full investigation rather than quashed at this preliminary stage.

Procedural Irregularities and Transfer Recommendations

The investigation into the matter has encountered significant procedural questions regarding the consistency of the complainant's statements. The learned Additional Government Advocate (AGA), representing the State of Uttar Pradesh, informed the court that there were apparent contradictions between the statements recorded under Section 180 and Section 183 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS). Specifically, the AGA noted that the complainant had introduced allegations regarding an incident at a hotel in Lucknow that were entirely absent from both the original FIR and the initial statement provided under Section 180 BNSS.

Due to these inconsistencies and the fact that the primary allegations relate to events in Delhi, the Investigating Officer has recommended that the FIR be transferred to the jurisdiction of Delhi authorities. The matter is currently pending before the Deputy Police Commissioner of Lucknow, who is tasked with deciding the jurisdictional transfer.

Interim Order and Ongoing Cooperation

The court acknowledged the state's request for additional time to receive instructions regarding the progress of the transfer recommendation. Addressing the petitioner's concern that he might face immediate arrest while the jurisdictional question remained unresolved, the court granted interim protection.

The bench stated clearly: "Till the next date of listing, the petitioner shall not be arrested in pursuance of the impugned FIR , however, he shall cooperate in the investigation."

By conditioning this protection on his participation in the investigative process, the court ensured that the legal inquiry remains active while preventing potential overreach before a decision on jurisdiction is finalized. The petitioner has been permitted to file a rejoinder affidavit in the interim to further clarify his position against the allegations.

The case is now listed for further proceedings on November 4, 2026. The court’s decision to maintain the current status quo serves as a temporary safeguard for the petitioner, pending a more definitive resolution regarding whether the investigation will proceed in Lucknow or be moved to the national capital. The final determination of the petition will likely hinge on the upcoming report from the Deputy Police Commissioner and the resolution of the conflicting statements documented during the investigative phase.