Som Kanaujiya vs State Of U.P. Thru Prin Secy Home ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 5500 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
 
 

?Court No. - 1
 

 
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 4296 of 2022
 

 
Petitioner :- Som Kanaujiya
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru Prin Secy Home Civil Sectt U.P. Lko And Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Vidya Kant Sharma
 
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 Vidya Kant Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Chandra Shekhar Panday, learned AGA for the State-respondents.

The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner, seeking issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing impugned F.I.R. dated 07.06.2022 registered as Case Crime No.0546 of 2022, under Sections 3(1) of U.P. Gangster and Antisocial Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, Police Station Kotwali, District Barabanki with a further prayer to stay the arrest of the petitioner.

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 only one case, mentioned in the gang chart. Copy of gang chart is annexed as Annexure No.2 to the present petition.

He next argued that the petitioner has been granted bail in the aforesaid case by the Court below vide order dated 27.04.2022, copy of same is annexed as Annexure No.5 to the present petition and the impugned FIR under the Gangster Act has been lodged on 07.06.2022, 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

A.Dewal