Allahabad High Court
Suraj Yadav vs State Of U.P. And Another on 7 April, 2025
Author: Saurabh Srivastava
Bench: Saurabh Srivastava
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:49328
Court No. - 74
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 11110 of 2025
Applicant :- Suraj Yadav
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Kailash Nath,Manoj Yadav,Rahul Yadav
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Saurabh Srivastava,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. The instant application has been preferred with the prayer to quash/stay the entire proceeding of G.T. no.685 of 2023 (State vs. Piyush and others), and charge sheet dated 06.12.2022 as well as cognizance order dated 08.05.2023 under Section 3(1) of U.P. Gangster and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 arising out of Case Crime no.12 of 2022, PS- Chiraiyakot, District- Mau.
3. Learned counsel for applicant took precise grounds for challenging the entire proceedings that there is hardly any compliance of Rule 5 of Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Rules, 2021 which clearly demonstrate that the gang chart will not be approved summarily but after due discussion in a joint meeting of the Commissioner of Police/District Magistrate/Senior Superintendent of Police/Superintendent of Police which has already been prepared by concerned In-charge of Police Station/Station House Officer/Inspector, who present it before Additional Superintendent of Police and after seeking his due recommendation the same has to present before the District Head of Police and thereafter the same was to be approved in joint meeting with the authorities who are mentioned under Rule 5 who recommended the same and thereafter at the time of approval, the same has to be jointly finally approved. The approval which is appended along with application is available at page no.24 wherein the different dates have been mentioned by the different authorities which is strictly in terms of provision available under Rule 5 but there is hardly any compliance in respect of Rule 5(3)(a) of Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Rules, 2021.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant specifically submitted that there must be a joint meeting as mentioned in the Rule 5(3)(a) and the same has never been disclosed or mentioned at the time of approving the gang chart by concerned District Magistrate.
5. Learned counsel for the applicant further submitted that present FIR has been registered only under Section 3(1) Gangsters Act, without mentioning the corresponding section i.e. 2b, mentioning the anti-social activities in which the applicant is involved and on the basis of which he was named as gangster and charge sheet has been also submitted only under Section 3(1) Gangster Act and court concerned has also taken cognizance against the same section without mentioning the corresponding section. For substantiating his argument, learned counsel for applicant relied upon judgment rendered by Division Bench of this Court on dated 2.12.2023 passed in Crl. Misc. Writ Petition no. 18729 of 2023 (Asim @ Hassim vs. State of U.P. and another).
6. Per contra, learned AGA vehemently opposed the prayer as made in the application and rebutted the stand taken up by learned counsel for the applicant by way of taking reliance of Rule 16(2) of Rules of 2021, wherein there is hardly any mention of joint meeting which shall be conducted at the time of approving gang chart by concerned Commissioner of Police/District Magistrate.
7. After hearing rival submissions extended by learned counsel for the parties, this Court finds that the rules are crystal clear at the initial stage which is mentioned under Rule 5(3)(a) of the Rules of 2021 for holding joint meeting of the authorities concerned which includes the presenting officer, forwarding officer and thereafter the discussion shall be made with the approving authority. The rules mentioned below to Rule 5 of the Rules of 2021 although clarified the wording and the orders which ought to be passed by the approving authority but the missing of joint meeting/discussion is not necessarily to be reproduced time and again since the legislature and law makers are conscious not to repeat the procedure in each and every rules/sections in the concerned Act/Rules since the study of the sections available in the rules framed under the Act has to be read in a procedural manner where it is written in sub-sequential order and as such the provision contained under the Rule 5(3)(a) of Rules of 2021 has to be given preference while reading other rules which are mentioned below to Rule 5 of the Rules of 2021 and as such the specific provision for holding joint meeting is mandatory on the part of all the officers who are involved in forwarding the gang chart and finally it is incumbent upon the approving authority to hold meeting under Section 5(3)(a) of the Rules of 2021. The said procedure which is mandated on the part of the approving authority is missing in the instant matter.
8. Further, in the present case, the impugned FIR was registered under Section 3(1) Gangsters Act, without mentioning the corresponding provision, mentioning the anti-social activities in which the accused is involved and on the basis of which he was named as gangster. A person cannot be punished without specifying the offence committed by him which would justify his classification as a Gangster.
9. Lastly, contention as raised by learned counsel for the applicant regarding violation of Rule 8 of U.P. Gangster and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Rules, 2021, wherein it has been specifically mentioned that stating unconfirmed or false information is prohibited while preparation of gang chart, wherein the name of applicant is at serial no.4 and he has been shown under incarceration, which has been approved by approving authority on dated 27th January, 2022, but as per the bail order dated 20.12.2021 extended in favour of the applicant by learned court of Session Judge, Mau in Case Crime No.134 of 2021, under section 392, 411 I.P.C. and the said bail order has been passed after hearing the arguments raised by learned District Government Counsel (Criminal), District Mau and as such the approval of gang chart itself shows complete violation of Rule 8 of Rules 2021 and as such entire proceedings arising out of approval of the gang chart which culminated into preferring the charge sheet on dated 06.12.2022 thereafter the order passed by learned concerned court by way of taking cognizance on dated 08.05.2023 is hereby quashed and set aside.
10. However, the above mentioned order will not preclude the concerned authorities for re-initiation of the proceedings against applicant, if required further, in accordance with law.
11. The application stands allowed accordingly.
Order Date :- 7.4.2025
Saif
