C528/2058/2025
2025 Latest Caselaw 5562 UK

Citation : 2025 Latest Caselaw 5562 UK
Judgement Date : 18 November, 2025

Uttarakhand High Court

C528/2058/2025 on 18 November, 2025

Author: Pankaj Purohit

Bench: Pankaj Purohit

                Office Notes,
             reports, orders or
SL.           proceedings or
      Date                                      COURT'S OR JUDGES'S ORDERS
No             directions and
             Registrar's order
              with Signatures

                                  C528 No.2058 of 2025
                                  Hon'ble Pankaj Purohit, J.

Mr. Prashant Khanna, learned counsel for applicants.

2. Mr. Akshay Latwal, learned A.G.A. with Ms. Sweta Badola Dobhal and Mr. Prabhat Kandpal, learned Brief Holders for the State of Uttarakhand/respondent No.1.

3. By means of the present C528 application, applicants have put to challenge the charge-sheet dated 31.01.2025 (Annexure No.5), cognizance/summoning order dated 03.02.2025 (Annexure No.6) passed by learned Special Judge Gangster Act/1st Additional Sessions Judge, District Dehradun in Special Sessions Trial No.04 of 2025 State Vs. Kamlesh Khantwal and Ors., under Section 2/3 of the U.P. Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), as well as the proceedings of aforementioned case.

4. It is the main contention of learned counsel for applicants that before invoking the provisions of Section 2/3 of the Act, there is no specific satisfaction recorded by the District Magistrate and SSP of the District.

5. To substantiate his argument, he relied upon a judgment and order passed by this Court in WPCRL No.861 of 2023 Arun Choudhary and Another Vs. State of Uttarakhand and Others, decided on 30.07.2025. It is contended by learned counsel for the applicants that in the government order dated 10.10.1997, only Rule whereby, it has been prescribed as to how the provisions of the Act would be invoked is prescribed in Clause 8(x), which is quoted herein below:-

Þ8(x) fxjksg dh lwph ds lkFk leqfpr lk{; ,oa vk/kkj dk fooj.k Hkh j[kk tk;s rFkk ofj'B iqfyl v/kh{kd@iqfyl v/kh{kd bl laca/k esa ftykf/kdkjh ds lkFk Hkyh&Hkkafr ijh{k.k ds mijkUr gh bl lwph dks vfUre :i iznku djsAß

6. It is argued by him that Clause 8 (x) of the G.O. dated 10.10.1997 provides that there should be satisfaction recorded by the SSP and the District Magistrate while finalizing the list for invoking the provisions of the Act, but, in this case, there is not such procedure adopted by the respondent-State, and therefore, entire proceeding against the applicants under the provisions of Section 2/3 of the Act is quite illegal and cannot sustain.

7. Prima-facie, this Court finds substance in the submission made by learned counsel for the applicants, therefore, this Court is inclined to interfere in the matter.

8. Respondents may file counter affidavit within four weeks.

9. Put up on 25.02.2026.

10. In the meantime, the proceedings of Special Sessions Trial No.04 of 2025 State Vs. Kamlesh Khantwal and Ors., pending in the Court of learned Special Judge Gangster Act/First Additional Sessions Judge, District Dehradun, shall remain stayed.