JUDGMENT : Amreshwar Pratap Sahi, J. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. The petitioner is the son of Sri Pawan Kumar Pandey. The description given in the writ petition is to the effect that the petitioner was pursuing his studies abroad and he is a graduate in Science from the University of Bedfordshire, United Kingdom. He for the time being is available in India and he has decided to enter into business for which he requires a Character Certificate from the District Magistrate in order to enter into a contract with any Government Department. Consequently, the petitioner who is aged about 23 years moved an application for grant of such certificate on which a police report was called for, where after the impugned order dated 20.03.2017 has been passed by the District Magistrate refusing to grant Character Certificate to the petitioner on the ground that there were certain criminal cases pending against the father of the petitioner. Thus, the criminal antecedents of his father has been taken to be a ground to refuse the grant of a character certificate to the petitioner. 2. Learned Standing Counsel submits that the antecedents has to be seen while granting such a certificate and if the petitioner belongs to such a family where his own father is involved in criminal activities, the character of the petitioner cannot be certified keeping in view the police report. 3. We have considered the submissions raised and what we find is that the police report, which has been discussed in the impugned order does not indicate any element of deficiency in the character or involvement of the petitioner in any such activity, which may be an ingredient so as to deny a character certificate to the petitioner. The involvement of the petitioner's father in some criminal cases, therefore, cannot be a ground, in our opinion, to deny a character certificate to the petitioner, who is nowhere involved in the criminal activities alleged to be that of his father more so in the wake of the fact that the petitioner was a student and had been pursuing his studies abroad. 4. The petitioner cannot be punished or denied the enforcement of his rights more so in relation to a criminal activity of the petitioner's father unless it can be shown that the petitioner's character is also affected by any such activity of his father. 5. 4. The petitioner cannot be punished or denied the enforcement of his rights more so in relation to a criminal activity of the petitioner's father unless it can be shown that the petitioner's character is also affected by any such activity of his father. 5. Consequently, it will be open to the District Magistrate to obtain a fresh report from the police about the personal antecedents of the petitioner and then proceed to pass an appropriate order in accordance with law. 6. For the reasons aforesaid, we quash the order dated 20.03.2017 and direct the District Magistrate to pass a fresh order in accordance with law within a period of three months from the date of presentation of a certified copy of this order.