Allahabad High Court
Mangla Prasad And 2 Others vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home ... on 8 January, 2025
Author: Saurabh Lavania
Bench: Saurabh Lavania
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:1422
Court No. - 12
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 11852 of 2024
Applicant :- Mangla Prasad And 2 Others
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. And Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Sagar Singh,Shri Ram Maurya,Umang Rai
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J.
1. Heard Shri Umang Rai, learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material available on record.
2. This application has been filed seeking the following main relief(s):-
"a. QUASH the Non-Bailable warrant dated 12.02.2020 passed by Additional District and Session Judge-5, Gangster Act, Unnao in Session Trial No.144/12 (Sate versus Ramchandra & others) airsing out of FIR No.088/10, dated 9.12.2010, case crime no.1689/10, Under Section 3(1) Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 (for short 'Gangsters Act') loged at Police Station- Bara Sagwar, District Unnao.
b. QUASH the Charge Sheet dated 29.04.11 bearing no.28/11 Police Station ? Bara Sagwar, District- Unnao, arising out of FIR No.-088/10, dated 09.12.10 lodged at Police Station ? Bara Sagwar, District ? Unnao, under sections 2(3) Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 for short (Gangsters Act)."
3. The submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is innocent and he has falsely been implicated in the instant case.
4. It is stated that based upon the Criminal Case No.1416 of 2010 under Sections 323, 506, 427 I.P,.C. and Section 3(i)(x) of SC/ST Act, the provisions of U.P. Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 (in short 'Act 1986') were invoked against the applicants and the Investigating Officer without conducting proper investigation in the light of the language couched under the Act 1986 to attract the offence indicated therein submitted the Charge Sheet No.28 of 2011 dated 29.04.2011, after lodging the FIR No.088 of 2010 on 09.12.2010 making allegations to attract offence indicated under Section 2/3 of Act 1986.
5. He further stated that in F.I.R., in issue, the allegations with regard to disturbing the public order as also regarding gaining undue temporal, pecuniary, material or other advantage of like nature against the applicant are vague. Further, stated that in absence of allegation concerning an act or omission on the part of an accused, covered by the definition of term "gang" and "gangster" as provided under Section 2 of the Act, no FIR is maintainable. In the instant case, the FIR is based upon the pending criminal case(s) and not upon any new allegation(s) or discovery of fact(s) having serious reflection on the society, for which purpose the Act was enacted.
6. He also stated that the provisions of the Act could not be used as a weapon to wreak vengeance or harass or intimidate citizens or to settle scores on political or other fronts.
7. He also stated that in this case, it appears that the District Administration in order to show good work or to win laurels or seek appreciation from the higher authorities of Government or ruling party has invoked the provisions of the Act, which is unjustified.
8. It is also stated that Case Crime No.1416 of 2010, the basis of the proceedings of Act 1986, has been concluded by the trial court vide judgment and order of acquittal dated 28.01.2017.
9. It is further stated that recently the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Farhana Vs State of U.P. and others, reported in 2024 SCC Online SC 159 quashed the proceedings related to the provisions of the Act of 1986 on the ground that in the case based upon which proceedings under Act of 1986 were initiated was quashed by the High Court. The relevant paragraphs are as under:-
"12. From a bare perusal of Section 2(b)(i) of the Gangsters Act, it would become apparent that the person alleged to be the member of the gang should be found indulging in anti-social activities which would be covered under the offences punishable under Chapters XVI, or XVII or XXII IPC. There is no dispute that the case set up by the prosecution against the appellants insofar as the offences under the Gangsters Act are concerned, is limited to Section 2(b)(i) reproduced supra and none of the other clauses of the provision have been pressed into service for the proposed prosecution.
13. Needless to say that for framing a charge for the offence under the Gangsters Act and for continuing the prosecution of the accused under the above provisions, the prosecution would be required to clearly state that the appellants are being prosecuted for any one or more offences covered by anti-social activities as defined under Section 2(b).
14. There being no dispute that in the proceedings of the sole FIR registered against the appellants for the offences under Chapter XVII IPC being Crime Case No. 173 of 2019, the appellants stand exonerated with the quashing of the said FIR by the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad by exercising the powers under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, vide order dated 3rd March, 2023 passed in Application No. 7228 of 2023.
15. Hence, the very foundation for continuing the prosecution of the appellants under the provisions of the Gangsters Act stands struck off and as a consequence, the continued prosecution of the appellants for the said offence is unjustified and tantamounts to abuse of the process of Court.
16. As a consequence of the discussion made herein above, the impugned orders dated 14th November, 2022 and 6th December, 2022 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad are quashed and set aside. Resultantly, the impugned FIR being Crime Case No.424 of 2022 for offence punishable under Section 3(1) of the Gangsters Act, registered at Police Station- Bhognipur, District- Kanpur Dehat and all the proceedings sought to be taken thereunder against the appellants are hereby quashed."
10. The case, i.e. Case Crime No.088 of 2010, basis of pending proceedings under the Act of 1986 against the applicants, mentioned in the gang chart and the fact that the applicants have been acquitted vide judgment dated 28.01.2017 passed in the Case Crime No.088 of 2010 and also the observation made by the Honb'e Apex Court in the case of Farhana (supra) are not in dispute.
11. In the similar circumstances the Hon'ble Apex Court has quashed the proceedings initiated under the Act of 1986 and further, Case Crime No.088 of 2010, the basis of the proceedings of Act 1986, has been concluded by the trial court vide judgment and order of acquittal dated 28.01.2017.
12. Considering the aforesaid, this Court finds that interference in the matter is required. Accordingly, the entire proceedings of S.T. No.144/12 arising out of FIR No.088/10, under Section 3(1) of the Act of 1986, Police Station- Bara Sagwar, District Unnao pending before the Court of Additional District & Session Judge-5, Gangster Act, Unnao, are hereby quashed.
13. The instant application stands allowed in above terms.
Order Date :- 8.1.2025
Anand/-
