Uttarakhand High Court
Javed vs State Of Uttarakhand And Others on 3 March, 2023
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT
NAINITAL
Criminal Writ Petition No.385 of 2023
Javed ....Petitioner
Versus
State of Uttarakhand and Others ....Respondents
Present:-
Mr. Pranav Singh, Advocate for the petitioner.
Ms. Manisha Rana Singh, A.G.A. with Ms. Shiwali Joshi,
Brief Holder for the State.
JUDGMENT
Hon'ble Ravindra Maithani, J. (Oral)
The petitioner seeks quashing of FIR No.0010 of
2023, dated 05.01.2023, under Section 3(1) of the U.P.
Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986
("the Act"), Police Station Kotwali Kotdwar, District Pauri
Garhwal.
2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and
perused the record.
3. According to the FIR, the applicant and the co-
accused are involved in a criminal case. They would threaten
people, commit forgery, extract money and are involved in
anti social activities. The FIR also records that people are
afraid of deposing against the petitioner and the co-accused.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit
that the petitioner was involved only in one case, in which he
has already been granted anticipatory bail. He is not involved
in any anti-social activity; the FIR is baseless; the earlier FIR
was lodged on the basis of the confession of the co-accused.
Therefore, no offence is made out against the petitioner.
5. Learned State Counsel would submit that the
FIR discloses commission of offence.
6. Section 3 of the Act provides for penalty to a
gangster. Gangster has been defined under Section 2(c) of the
Act, which is as hereunder:-
"2. Definitions. - In this Act,-
(a) ....................................
(b) .....................................
(c) "gangster" means a member or leader or organiser
of a gang and includes any person who abets or
assists in the activities of a gang enumerated in
clause (b), whether before or after the commission of
such activities or harbours any person who has
indulged in such activities."
7. The word 'Gang' has also been defined under
Section 2(b) of the Act. It is as hereunder:-
"2. Definitions. - - In this Act,-
(a) ....................................
(b) "Gang" means a group of persons, who acting
either singly or collectively, by violence, or threat or
show of violence, or intimidation, or coercion or
otherwise with the object of disturbing public order
or of gaining any undue temporal, pecuniary,
material or other advantage for himself or any other
person, indulge in anti-social activities, namely-
......................................................
............................................................
............................................................
8. The FIR in the instant case reveals that the
petitioner is involved in act of forgery, etc. to get pecuniary
advantages. He is indulged in anti-social activities along with
the co-accused. It also records that people are afraid of
deposing against the petitioner.
9. The allegations, as levelled in the FIR, would fall
for scrutiny during investigation. Merely on the assertion of
the petitioner, the FIR may not be quashed. The FIR in the
instant case discloses commission of offences. In case such
discloser is made, generally no interference is warranted,
under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Therefore, this
Court is of the view that there is no reason to make any
interference. Accordingly, the petition deserves to be
dismissed at the stage of admission itself.
10. The petition is dismissed in limine.
(Ravindra Maithani, J.)
03.03.2023
Ravi Bisht
