Kunal Shukla vs State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 22729 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
 
 

?Court No. - 1
 

 
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 9898 of 2022
 

 
Petitioner :- Kunal Shukla
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko. And Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Saurabh Kumar
 
Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
 

 
Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J.

Hon'ble Mrs. Renu Agarwal,J.

Heard Shri Saurabh Kumar, learned Counsel for the petitioner, Ms. Meera Tripathi, learned A.G.A. for the State-respondents and perused the impugned F.I.R. as well as material brought on record.

The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner - Kunal Shukla, with a prayer to issue a writ in the nature of certiorari to quash the impugned FIR dated 08.12.2022, lodged by opposite party no.4, in FIR No.342 of 2022, under Sections 2 & 3(1) of The U.P. Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 (hereinafter referred to as "Gangster Act"), Police Station Motigarpur, District Sultanpur with a further prayer to not arrest the petitioner in pursuance of impugned FIR and also to quash the gang chart dated 02.12.2022 approved by District Magistrate, Sultanpur.

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 one case, mentioned in the gang chart. Copy of gang chart is annexed as Annexure-2 to the present petition.

He next argued that the petitioner has been granted bail in the aforesaid case by learned Sessions Judge, Sultanpur vide order dated 17.05.2022 passed in Bail Application No.1194 of 2022 and the impugned FIR under the Gangster Act has been lodged on 08.12.2022, which is just an abuse of process of law.

He next argued that the petitioner is a minor boy and neither a member of any gang nor runs 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 submits that except one case, petitioner has no criminal history and even the alleged case was registered on the basis of concocted story. It has further been 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. He has further submitted that the Gangster Act can be invoked even on the basis of single case. In support of his submissions, he 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. Renu Agarwal, J.) (Ramesh Sinha, J.)

Order Date :- 23.12.2022

Arnima