Abhishek Giri Alias Mukundi vs State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 9379 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
 
 

?Court No. - 1
 

 
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 5635 of 2022
 

 
Petitioner :- Abhishek Giri Alias Mukundi
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Civil Secrtt. Lko And Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Deo Raj Singh,Adarsh Srivastava
 
Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
 

 
Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J.

Hon'ble Mrs. Saroj Yadav,J.

Heard Shri Deo Raj Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner, Smt. Meera Tripathi, learned A.G.A. for the State-respondents and perused the impugned F.I.R. as well as material brought on record.

This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner- Abhishek Giri Alias Mukundi with a prayer to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certioari to quash the impugned F.I.R. dated 06.05.2022 registered as F.I.R. No.151 of 2022, under Section 2/3 of U.P. Gansters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, Police Station Bakshi Ka Talab, District Lucknow with a further prayer to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to not to arrest the petitioner in pursuance of the impugned F.I.R.

It has been argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case on the basis of 11 criminal history against the petitioner, a copy of details of cases is annexed as Annexure No.2 to the writ petition. He next argued that the petitioner has not been convicted in any cases and the impugned FIR under the Gangster Act has been lodged on 06.05.2022, which is just an abuse of process of law. He next argued that the petitioner is neither member nor run any gang involved in anti-social activities, hence he does not fall within the ambit of gangster as defined under Section 2(c) of the Gangster Act. He further argued that impugned F.I.R. has been lodged by respondent no.4, who is Inspector at Police Station Bakshi Ka Talab, District Lucknow just for the purpose of harassment with oblique motive. He further argued that the petitioner has not committed any offence and, prima facie, no case is made out against him, hence, the impugned F.I.R. is liable to be quashed.

Per contra, learned A.G.A. has submitted that from perusal of the allegations made in the impugned F.I.R., it cannot be said that no cognizable offence is made out against the petitioner, hence the impugned F.I.R. is not liable to be quashed. She has further submitted that the Gangster Act can be invoked even on the basis of single case. In support of her submissions, she has relied upon the Apex Court judgment in the case of Shraddha Gupta v. State of U.P. and others [2022 Law Suit (SC) 535].

After having examined the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and perused the impugned F.I.R., we are of the opinion that the impugned F.I.R. discloses cognizable offence against the petitioner, hence, no interference is called for by this Court in its extraordinary power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for quashing of the F.I.R. or for grant of any interim relief to the petitioner.

The petition lacks merit and is, accordingly, dismissed.

(Mrs. Saroj Yadav, J.) (Ramesh Sinha, J.)

Order Date :- 5.8.2022

Shubhankar