Vivek Pandey Alias Vikki vs State Of U.P. Thru Addl Chief Secy ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 5485 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
 
 

?Court No. - 1
 

 
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 4210 of 2022
 

 
Petitioner :- Vivek Pandey Alias Vikki
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru Addl Chief Secy Home U.P. Civil Sectt Lko And Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Aditya Vikram Shahi
 
Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
 

 
Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J.

Hon'ble Ajai Kumar Srivastava-I,J.

The Court has convened through Video Conferencing.

Heard Shri Aditya Vikram Sahi, learned Counsel for the petitioner, Shri Umesh Chandra Verma, 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 - Vivek Pandey Alias Vikki with a prayer to issue a writ in the nature of certiorari to quash the impugned FIR dated 04.05.2022 registered as F.I.R. No.83/2022, under Section 3(1) of The U.P. Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 (hereinafter referred to as "Gangster Act"), Police Station Karoundi Kala, District Sultanpur with a further prayer to not arrest the petitioner in pursuance of impugned FIR.

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 as is evident from the record. He next argued that the petitioner has been granted bail in the aforesaid case i.e. Case Crime No.022 of 2022, under Sections 386, 387 and 393 I.P.C., Police Station Karoundi Kala, District Sultanpur by the court below vide order dated 09.03.2022 and the impugned FIR under the Gangster Act has been lodged on 04.05.2022, which is just an abuse of process of law. He next argued that the petitioner is neither member 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 further submitted that the Gangsters 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 jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for quashing the F.I.R. or for grant of any interim relief to the petitioner.

The petition lacks merit and is, accordingly, dismissed.

.

(Ajai Kumar Srivastava-I,J.) (Ramesh Sinha,J.)

Order Date :- 28.6.2022

Mahesh