State v. Kailash Yadav and others) including the summoning order dated

1.Heard Sri Mahesh Kumar Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Jay Prakash, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State.

2. Issue notice to opposite party No.2 returnable at an early date, for which, necessary steps be taken within a week.

3. Office to proceed accordingly.

4. By means of this petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the applicant has prayed for quashing of the entire as well as consequential proceedings of Criminal Case No.1169 of 2023 (State vs. Kailash Yadav and others) including the summoning order dated 26.04.2023 passed by the learned Special Judge, Gangsters Act, Lucknow, whereby the applicant has been summoned as an accused under Section 2/3 of U.P. Gangsters Act and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 in the aforesaid Criminal Case No.1169 of 2023 (State vs. Kailash Yadav & others) and the charge-sheet No.01 of 2022, arising out of Case Crime No.429 of 2017, under Section 2/3 of U.P. Gangsters Act, Police Station-Krishna Nagar, District-Lucknow, pending before the learned Special Judge, Gangsters Act, Lucknow.

5. Attention has been drawn towards Annexure No.6 of the petition, which is an order dated 12.02.2024 passed by this Court in the Application (U/S 482 Cr.P.C.) No. 1274 of 2024 (Chandra Bhan Yadav @ Chandra Bhan vs. The State of U.P. & others), wherein this Court has granted an interim protection in favour of the accused, Chandra Bhan Yadav @ Chandra Bhan in the same gang-chart where the name of Chandra Bhan Yadav @ Chandra Bhan finds place at serial No. 06 and name of the applicant finds place at serial No.13. For convenience, the order dated 12.02.2024 passed in the case of Chandra Bhan yadav @ Chandra Bhan (supra) is being reproduced here-in-below:- "1.Heard Sri Sanjay Kumar Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Aniruddha Kumar Singh, learned Additional Government Advocate-I for the State.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has filed supplementary affidavit, today in the Court, the same is taken on record.

3. Issue notice to opposite party No.2 returnable at an early date, for which, necessary steps be taken within a week.

4. Office to proceed accordingly.

5. By means of this petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the petitioner has prayed for quashing of the entire as well as consequential proceedings of Sessions Case No.1169 of 2023 (State vs. Kailash Yadav and others) including the summoning order dated 26.04.2023 passed by the learned Special Judge, Gangsters Act, Lucknow, whereby the petitioner has been summoned as an accused under Section 2/3 of U.P. Gangsters Act and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 in the aforesaid Sessions Case No.1169 of 2023 (State vs. Kailash Yadav & others) and the charge-sheet No.01 of 2022, arising out of Case Crime No.429 of 2017, under Section 2/3 of U.P. Gangsters Act, Police Station-Krishna Nagar, District-Lucknow, pending before the learned Special Judge, Gangsters Act, Lucknow.

6. Attention has been drawn towards Annexure No.12 of the petition, which is an order dated 10.01.2024 passed by this Court in the Application (U/S 482 Cr.P.C.) No.9622 of 2023 (Ram Naresh Yadav vs. The State of U.P. & others), wherein this Court has granted an interim protection in favour of the accused, Ram Naresh Yadav in the same gang-chart where the name of Ram Naresh Yadav finds place at serial No. 02 and name of the petitioner finds place at serial No.06. For convenience, the order dated 10.01.2024 passed in the case of Ram Naresh Yadav (supra) is being reproduced here-in-below:- "1. Heard Sri Vivek Raj Singh, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Anjani Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Aniruddha Kumar Singh, learned Additional Government Advocate-I for opposite parties nos. 1 and 2 both.

2. By means of this petition, the petitioner has prayed the following relief: "Wherefore, it is most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to quash the entire as well as consequential proceedings of Sessions Case No. 1169/2023 (State Vs. Kailash Yadav and Others), pending before the Learned Court of Special Judge Gangsters Act, Lucknow, impugned summoning order, dated 26.04.2023, passed by learned Court of Special Judge Gangsters Act, Lucknow whereby the Applicant has been summoned as an accused under Sections 2/3 of the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 in aforesaid Sessions Case No. 1169/2023 (State Vs. Kailash Yadav and Others), and charge-sheet dated 28.12.2022, bearing Charge-sheet No. 01/2022 filed under Sections 2/3 of the Gangsters Act, arising out of the First Information Report, dated 31.07.2017, bearing Case Crime No. 429/2017 registered at Police Station Krishna Nagar, District-Lucknow."

3. Learned Senior Advocate has stated that the present petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case, inasmuch he has not committed the offence under which the impugned chargesheet has been filed, cognizance has been taken and summon has been issued. He has further submitted that the alleged date of incident is relating to the year, 2017 wherein the FIR was lodged on 31.07.2017, chargesheet has been filed on 28.12.2022 and cognizance thereof has been taken on 26.04.2023.

4. Since there is a specific provision under the Gangsters Act that the Commissioner of Police/Senior Superintendent of Police/Superintendent of Police shall accord the sanction for the prosecution and so as to satisfy the aforesaid legal provision, the Deputy Commissioner of Police (South), Lucknow has given sanction for prosecution on 14.12.2022 (Annexure no. 11).

5. While invoking the powers conferred by Section 23 of the U.P. Gangster Act, 1986 (Act No. 7 of 1986), the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Rules, 2021 have been promulgated vide Notification No. 5203/VI-p-9-2021-31 (43)-2013TC, Home (Police), Section 9, dated December 27, 2021, therefore, it is clear that sanction for prosecution has been granted by the Competent Authority after promulgation of the aforesaid Rules, 2021.

6. Rule 24 of the aforesaid Rules clearly provides that the investigation in the offence in question shall be completed within a period of six months and further extension for 3 months may be given but no investigation can be permitted to be extended for more than one year. However, in the present case, for the incident of the year, 2017, the sanction for prosecution has been given on 14.12.2022 i.e. after lapse of more than 5 years and chargesheet has been filed on 28th of December, 2022, therefore, there is apparent illegality in filing the chargesheet.

7. Learned Senior Advocate has further submitted that the Deputy Commissioner of Police (South), Lucknow should have not given the approval of the chargesheet which has been filed after a substantial delay of more than 5 years, in contravention of the provision of Rule 24.

8. Learned Senior Advocate has further drawn attention of this Court towards the order dated 14.12.2022 passed by Deputy Commissioner of Police (South), Lucknow, thereby prosecution sanction has been approved against the petitioner referring one Government Order No. 12/06 Pu-11-2004-58(Writ)/2003, dated 02.01.2004, whereas at the time of promulgation of Rules 21, it has been clearly indicated that after issuing Notification of the aforesaid Rule, all the Government Orders and Notifications etc., made under the Act, 1986, shall be superseded except as respect of things are done or omitted to be done before such supersession.

9. Learned Senior Advocate has stated that he cannot lay his hand at any provision of law or any statutory order saying that the aforesaid Government Order dated 02.01.2004 would have some effect after notifying the Rules, 2021.

10. Therefore, learned Senior Advocate has stated that the impugned chargesheet, cognizance thereof and summoning order are nullity in the eyes of law, therefore, the aforesaid chargesheet etc. may be quashed.

11. On being asked on the aforesaid submission of learned Senior Advocate from the learned AGA, he has stated that so far as argument of learned Senior Advocate regarding the order dated 14.12.2022 (Annexure no. 11) is concerned, he does not having the copy of the Government Order dated 02.01.2004 as the same has not been provided by the prosecution, therefore, he cannot say that after Rules 2021 having been notified on 27th of December, 2021 as to whether the sanction of prosecution can be granted on the basis of Government Order on 02.01.2004.

12. On being further asked about the Rule 24 which provides the expeditious investigation and in the present case, prima facie, it appears that there is apparent violation of Rule 24, learned AGA has stated that he may be given some reasonable time to file counter affidavit wherein he shall explain not only the factual aspect of the present case but also indicate the legal position.

13. The matter requires consideration.

14. Let a detailed counter affidavit be filed within a period of four weeks. Rejoinder affidavit, if any, may also be filed within a period of two weeks thereafter.

15. List this case in the week commencing 11.03.2024, within top ten cases.

16. Till the next date of listing, the petitioner shall not be compelled to participate in the proceedings of Sessions Case No. 1169/2023 (supra).

17. However, it is made clear that this protection order has been passed only in favour of the petitioner, therefore, the proceedings of the aforesaid case may go on strictly in accordance with law."

7.Learned counsel for the petitioner has stated that he is also adopting the same arguments and case of the present petitioner is similar and identical with the case of Ram Naresh Yadav (supra), therefore, benefit of order dated 10.01.2024 passed in the case of Ram Naresh Yadav (supra) may be extended to the present petitioner.

8. The matter requires consideration.

9. Let the counter affidavit be filed within a period of three weeks.

10. List and connect with Application (U/S 482 Cr.P.C.) No.9622 of 2023 (Ram Naresh Yadav vs. The State of U.P. & others).

11. Till the next date of listing, the benefit of interim order dated 10.01.2024 shall be extended to the present petitioner. However, it is made clear that this protection has been given to the present petitioner and one Ram Naresh Yadav (supra), therefore, the proceedings of the aforesaid case may go on strictly in accordance with law. "

6.Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that he is also adopting the same arguments and case of the present applicant is similar and identical with the case of Chandra Bhan Yadav @ Chandra Bhan (supra), therefore, benefit of order dated 12.02.2024 passed in the case of Chandra Bhan Yadav @ Chandra Bhan (supra) may be extended to the present applicant.

7. The matter requires consideration.

8. Let the counter affidavit be filed within a period of three weeks.

9. List and connect with Application (U/S 482 Cr.P.C.) No. 1274 of 2024 (Chandra Bhan Yadav @ Chandra Bhan vs. The State of U.P. & others).

10. Till the next date of listing, the benefit of interim order dated 12.02.2024 shall be extended to the present applicant. However, it is made clear that this protection has been given to the present applicant and one Chandra Bhan Yadav @ Chandra Bhan (supra), therefore, the proceedings of the aforesaid case may go on strictly in accordance with law. Order Date :- 14.5.2025 AKK

1.Heard Sri Mahesh Kumar Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Jay Prakash, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State.

2. Issue notice to opposite party No.2 returnable at an early date, for which, necessary steps be taken within a week.

3. Office to proceed accordingly.

4. By means of this petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the applicant has prayed for quashing of the entire as well as consequential proceedings of Criminal Case No.1169 of 2023 (State vs. Kailash Yadav and others) including the summoning order dated 26.04.2023 passed by the learned Special Judge, Gangsters Act, Lucknow, whereby the applicant has been summoned as an accused under Section 2/3 of U.P. Gangsters Act and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 in the aforesaid Criminal Case No.1169 of 2023 (State vs. Kailash Yadav & others) and the charge-sheet No.01 of 2022, arising out of Case Crime No.429 of 2017, under Section 2/3 of U.P. Gangsters Act, Police Station-Krishna Nagar, District-Lucknow, pending before the learned Special Judge, Gangsters Act, Lucknow.

5. Attention has been drawn towards Annexure No.6 of the petition, which is an order dated 12.02.2024 passed by this Court in the Application (U/S 482 Cr.P.C.) No. 1274 of 2024 (Chandra Bhan Yadav @ Chandra Bhan vs. The State of U.P. & others), wherein this Court has granted an interim protection in favour of the accused, Chandra Bhan Yadav @ Chandra Bhan in the same gang-chart where the name of Chandra Bhan Yadav @ Chandra Bhan finds place at serial No. 06 and name of the applicant finds place at serial No.13. For convenience, the order dated 12.02.2024 passed in the case of Chandra Bhan yadav @ Chandra Bhan (supra) is being reproduced here-in-below:- "1.Heard Sri Sanjay Kumar Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Aniruddha Kumar Singh, learned Additional Government Advocate-I for the State.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has filed supplementary affidavit, today in the Court, the same is taken on record.

3. Issue notice to opposite party No.2 returnable at an early date, for which, necessary steps be taken within a week.

4. Office to proceed accordingly.

5. By means of this petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the petitioner has prayed for quashing of the entire as well as consequential proceedings of Sessions Case No.1169 of 2023 (State vs. Kailash Yadav and others) including the summoning order dated 26.04.2023 passed by the learned Special Judge, Gangsters Act, Lucknow, whereby the petitioner has been summoned as an accused under Section 2/3 of U.P. Gangsters Act and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 in the aforesaid Sessions Case No.1169 of 2023 (State vs. Kailash Yadav & others) and the charge-sheet No.01 of 2022, arising out of Case Crime No.429 of 2017, under Section 2/3 of U.P. Gangsters Act, Police Station-Krishna Nagar, District-Lucknow, pending before the learned Special Judge, Gangsters Act, Lucknow.

6. Attention has been drawn towards Annexure No.12 of the petition, which is an order dated 10.01.2024 passed by this Court in the Application (U/S 482 Cr.P.C.) No.9622 of 2023 (Ram Naresh Yadav vs. The State of U.P. & others), wherein this Court has granted an interim protection in favour of the accused, Ram Naresh Yadav in the same gang-chart where the name of Ram Naresh Yadav finds place at serial No. 02 and name of the petitioner finds place at serial No.06. For convenience, the order dated 10.01.2024 passed in the case of Ram Naresh Yadav (supra) is being reproduced here-in-below:- "1. Heard Sri Vivek Raj Singh, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Anjani Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Aniruddha Kumar Singh, learned Additional Government Advocate-I for opposite parties nos. 1 and 2 both.

2. By means of this petition, the petitioner has prayed the following relief: "Wherefore, it is most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to quash the entire as well as consequential proceedings of Sessions Case No. 1169/2023 (State Vs. Kailash Yadav and Others), pending before the Learned Court of Special Judge Gangsters Act, Lucknow, impugned summoning order, dated 26.04.2023, passed by learned Court of Special Judge Gangsters Act, Lucknow whereby the Applicant has been summoned as an accused under Sections 2/3 of the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 in aforesaid Sessions Case No. 1169/2023 (State Vs. Kailash Yadav and Others), and charge-sheet dated 28.12.2022, bearing Charge-sheet No. 01/2022 filed under Sections 2/3 of the Gangsters Act, arising out of the First Information Report, dated 31.07.2017, bearing Case Crime No. 429/2017 registered at Police Station Krishna Nagar, District-Lucknow."

3. Learned Senior Advocate has stated that the present petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case, inasmuch he has not committed the offence under which the impugned chargesheet has been filed, cognizance has been taken and summon has been issued. He has further submitted that the alleged date of incident is relating to the year, 2017 wherein the FIR was lodged on 31.07.2017, chargesheet has been filed on 28.12.2022 and cognizance thereof has been taken on 26.04.2023.

4. Since there is a specific provision under the Gangsters Act that the Commissioner of Police/Senior Superintendent of Police/Superintendent of Police shall accord the sanction for the prosecution and so as to satisfy the aforesaid legal provision, the Deputy Commissioner of Police (South), Lucknow has given sanction for prosecution on 14.12.2022 (Annexure no. 11).

5. While invoking the powers conferred by Section 23 of the U.P. Gangster Act, 1986 (Act No. 7 of 1986), the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Rules, 2021 have been promulgated vide Notification No. 5203/VI-p-9-2021-31 (43)-2013TC, Home (Police), Section 9, dated December 27, 2021, therefore, it is clear that sanction for prosecution has been granted by the Competent Authority after promulgation of the aforesaid Rules, 2021.

6. Rule 24 of the aforesaid Rules clearly provides that the investigation in the offence in question shall be completed within a period of six months and further extension for 3 months may be given but no investigation can be permitted to be extended for more than one year. However, in the present case, for the incident of the year, 2017, the sanction for prosecution has been given on 14.12.2022 i.e. after lapse of more than 5 years and chargesheet has been filed on 28th of December, 2022, therefore, there is apparent illegality in filing the chargesheet.

7. Learned Senior Advocate has further submitted that the Deputy Commissioner of Police (South), Lucknow should have not given the approval of the chargesheet which has been filed after a substantial delay of more than 5 years, in contravention of the provision of Rule 24.

8. Learned Senior Advocate has further drawn attention of this Court towards the order dated 14.12.2022 passed by Deputy Commissioner of Police (South), Lucknow, thereby prosecution sanction has been approved against the petitioner referring one Government Order No. 12/06 Pu-11-2004-58(Writ)/2003, dated 02.01.2004, whereas at the time of promulgation of Rules 21, it has been clearly indicated that after issuing Notification of the aforesaid Rule, all the Government Orders and Notifications etc., made under the Act, 1986, shall be superseded except as respect of things are done or omitted to be done before such supersession.

9. Learned Senior Advocate has stated that he cannot lay his hand at any provision of law or any statutory order saying that the aforesaid Government Order dated 02.01.2004 would have some effect after notifying the Rules, 2021.

10. Therefore, learned Senior Advocate has stated that the impugned chargesheet, cognizance thereof and summoning order are nullity in the eyes of law, therefore, the aforesaid chargesheet etc. may be quashed.

11. On being asked on the aforesaid submission of learned Senior Advocate from the learned AGA, he has stated that so far as argument of learned Senior Advocate regarding the order dated 14.12.2022 (Annexure no. 11) is concerned, he does not having the copy of the Government Order dated 02.01.2004 as the same has not been provided by the prosecution, therefore, he cannot say that after Rules 2021 having been notified on 27th of December, 2021 as to whether the sanction of prosecution can be granted on the basis of Government Order on 02.01.2004.

12. On being further asked about the Rule 24 which provides the expeditious investigation and in the present case, prima facie, it appears that there is apparent violation of Rule 24, learned AGA has stated that he may be given some reasonable time to file counter affidavit wherein he shall explain not only the factual aspect of the present case but also indicate the legal position.

13. The matter requires consideration.

14. Let a detailed counter affidavit be filed within a period of four weeks. Rejoinder affidavit, if any, may also be filed within a period of two weeks thereafter.

15. List this case in the week commencing 11.03.2024, within top ten cases.

16. Till the next date of listing, the petitioner shall not be compelled to participate in the proceedings of Sessions Case No. 1169/2023 (supra).

17. However, it is made clear that this protection order has been passed only in favour of the petitioner, therefore, the proceedings of the aforesaid case may go on strictly in accordance with law."

7.Learned counsel for the petitioner has stated that he is also adopting the same arguments and case of the present petitioner is similar and identical with the case of Ram Naresh Yadav (supra), therefore, benefit of order dated 10.01.2024 passed in the case of Ram Naresh Yadav (supra) may be extended to the present petitioner.

8. The matter requires consideration.

9. Let the counter affidavit be filed within a period of three weeks.

10. List and connect with Application (U/S 482 Cr.P.C.) No.9622 of 2023 (Ram Naresh Yadav vs. The State of U.P. & others).

11. Till the next date of listing, the benefit of interim order dated 10.01.2024 shall be extended to the present petitioner. However, it is made clear that this protection has been given to the present petitioner and one Ram Naresh Yadav (supra), therefore, the proceedings of the aforesaid case may go on strictly in accordance with law. "

6.Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that he is also adopting the same arguments and case of the present applicant is similar and identical with the case of Chandra Bhan Yadav @ Chandra Bhan (supra), therefore, benefit of order dated 12.02.2024 passed in the case of Chandra Bhan Yadav @ Chandra Bhan (supra) may be extended to the present applicant.

7. The matter requires consideration.

8. Let the counter affidavit be filed within a period of three weeks.

9. List and connect with Application (U/S 482 Cr.P.C.) No. 1274 of 2024 (Chandra Bhan Yadav @ Chandra Bhan vs. The State of U.P. & others).

10. Till the next date of listing, the benefit of interim order dated 12.02.2024 shall be extended to the present applicant. However, it is made clear that this protection has been given to the present applicant and one Chandra Bhan Yadav @ Chandra Bhan (supra), therefore, the proceedings of the aforesaid case may go on strictly in accordance with law. Order Date :- 14.5.2025 AKK