High Court

Hon'ble Saurabh Srivastava,J.

1. Heard lerned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State-respondents.

2. The instant Application U/S 528 BNSS has been filed on behalf of the applicant for quashing the entire criminal proceedings dated 14.01.2025 and emanating from charge-sheet cognizance/summoning order dated 13.02.2025 in Special Trial No. 100 of 2025 (State vs. Raju Patel & Others) in relation to Case Crime No. 61 of 2020, under Section 3(1) of Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, Police Station-Tarkulwa, District-Deoria, which is pending before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 05/Special Judge (Gangster Act), Deoria.

3. On the basis of gang-chart prepared/forwarded/approved by the Police and Administrative Authority, FIR was lodged against the applicant and three other co-accused persons. The First Information Report giving rise to the crime, which after investigation, has culminated in the charge-sheet impugned, was submitted against the applicant and three other co-accused persons on 21.03.2020 at Police Station-Tarkulwa, District-Deoria, by opposite party no. 2 with the allegation that applicant has an organized gang wherein he is a gang-leader, whereas three other co-accused are members of the said Gang. It is further alleged in the impugned FIR that applicant is a notorious criminal and has been involved in the offences of murder, kidnapping and extortion for quite sometime and is also obtaining pecuniary gains from the same.

4. It is submitted by the counsel for the applicant that applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case on the basis of mala fide intentions of the police as there is no evidence available on record to show that the applicant is a part of any gang. It is further submitted that impugned FIR was lodged on the basis of a gang- chart, wherein, two cases have been shown against the applicant. It is further submitted that gang-chart prepared in the present case is not at all in consonance with the provisions of Rule 5(3)(c) of the Rules, 2021 as the same dictate that no cases where the accused has been acquitted shall be included in the gang-chart. According to gang-chart attached with the present case, two criminal cases have been shown against the applicant i.e. (i) Case crime No.46 of 2020, under Sections 461, 379, 411, 413 IPC and Section 25 of Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 and (ii) Case Crime No.37 of 2020, under Sections 461, 411, 413 IPC and Section 25 of Indian Telegraph Act, 1885. It is noteworthy that applicant is shown to have been involved in all the two cases cited in the gang-chart wherein applicant has already been enlarged on bail by the court concerned.

5. It is further submitted that according to the provisions of Rule 5(3)(e) of 2021, all the other criminal cases pending against the accused have to be attached with the gang-chart, but in the present case, no such separate list was attached with the gang-chart at the time when the same was approved. It is further contended that there is violation of relevant provisions of Section 2(b) of the Act as well as relevant provisions of Rules, 2021.

6. It is submitted by the learned counsel appearing for the applicant, that even if all allegations in the impugned FIR and charge-sheet are regarded as true, no case under Section 3(1) of Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 is made out against the applicant. In order to support the aforesaid submission, learned counsel has referred to the provisions of the gangster Act of 1986. He submits that there are two essential ingredients to constitute a gang. The two essential ingredients, according to learned counsel for the applicants, are 'violence' or 'disturbance of public order' indulged in by a group of persons, acting either singly or collectively, for the purpose of pecuniary gain etc.

7. It is the learned counsel for the applicants' submission that none of the offences charged against the applicant, either involves violence or the disturbance of public order. Therefore, even if there be allegations about pecuniary gain, the consequences under the Act of 1986 would not be attracted. He next submits that there are two base cases registered against the applicant, on the foot of which the present prosecution has been launched under Section 3(1) of Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, wherein applicant has been enlarged on bail by the court concerned. It is further submitted that the cases allegedly filed against the applicant are regarding the offence/crime committed by him in his private/personal capacity nor as a gang-leader of any gang whatsoever for temporal and pecuniary gains. Therefore, in the submission of the learned counsel, the base cases are not available to provide foundation to the prosecution to pursue the present case under the Act of 1986. It is in the last submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that there is violation of Rules 5, 6, 11, 15, 16, 21, 24 and 26 of The Uttar Pradesh Gangster and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Rules, 2021, vitiating the gang-chart. He has emphasized that non- adherence to these rules has vitiated the basis of registration of the crime and a fortiori the police report and the prosecution. He has emphatically submitted that violation of the aforesaid rules is not mere omission but it shows that the proceedings before registering FIR has been carried out mechanically without giving heed to the provisions of law and rules, which are of fundamental importance as any false and malicious prosecution entails serious consequences resulting into the deprivation of life and personal liberty of the accused person, which cannot be deprived except for the procedure established by law as is enshrined in the Article 21 of the Constitution of India. The forwarding, recommending and approving authorities have not paid any heed or attention to relevant law and rules, while exercising their authority with regard to the preparation and approval of the gang-chart. The whole exercise on their part has been carried out without application of mind.

8. On the other hand, learned AGA vehemently opposed the aforesaid contentions and submits that applicant is a leader of the gang, who is involved in committing the anti-social activities and crimes for pecuniary and temporal gains, but he could not dispute the violation of aforesaid Rules.

9. Considering the instant case in the light of the provisions of the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 and relevant Rules, it is evident that the gang chart in this case has been approved summarily without applying its mind as is apparent from the perusal of the gang chart. From the material available on record, it is apparent that the gang-chart was prepared, in which two cases are shown as base cases, which are as (i) Case crime No.46 of 2020, under Sections 461, 379, 411, 413 IPC and Section 25 of Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 and (ii) Case Crime No.37 of 2020, under Sections 461, 411, 413 IPC and Section 25 of Indian Telegraph Act, 1885. As from the record, it is clear that these above two case are apparently committed in private and personal capacity and the same do not come within the purview of the gangsterism. Furthermore there is no specific mention of offences which have been committed for pecuniary, materialistic and temporal or similar benefits or which disturbs the public order as per Rule 13. Furthermore, quick forwarding action has been taken in this case without caring for the compliance of the relevant procedural safeguards. There should be satisfaction recorded to the effect that there is just and legal basis for taking action under the Act and there is satisfactory basis for pursuing the case. The satisfaction so recorded should be there by using the mind independently but in the instant case the same is missing.

10. Considering the aforesaid submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties as well as perusal of records, it is evident from the records that at the time of approving the gang-chart, District Magistrate did not apply his mind as no reasons are recorded by him, resultantly, the lodging of FIR under Gangster Act is with malafide intention, in specific violation of procedural safeguards. It is further evident that the approving authority acted mechanically and the whole exercise lacks application of mind on the parts of the authorities concerned. The applicant has fundamental rights to life which include to live with honour and dignity and fundamental right of under Article 21 of the Constitution of India cannot be interfered with lightly. The applicant has been deprived of his liberty by the mechanical exercise/procedure undertaken on the part of the authorities concerned.

11. The procedural compliance in cases of gangster Act is of utmost importance, departure from the due process of law will give chance and provide fodder to the vested interests with singular agenda to spread false narratives. Verily, gangsterism poses an ominous threat to public order. Vile and abhorrent acts of gangsterism do evoke collective societal anger and anguish. While the war against gangsterism must be waged by the State with unwavering resolve but a civil democratic society can ill afford sacrificing the procedural safeguards provided under the law, and which is an integrated facet of the due process of law, at the altar of perceived peril to public order. "The Siren Song that the 'end justifies the means', and that the procedural safeguards are subservient to the overwhelming need to ensure that the accused is prosecuted and punished, must be muzzled by voice of Rule of Law."

12. For all the reasons recorded above, the court is of the view that at the stage of preparing and approving the gang-chart on the basis of materials placed, the competent Authorities should have satisfied themselves that there is a legal basis and justification for taking and pursuing action against the accused under the Act of 1986. At the stage of approval of the gang-chart, the approving Authority has to be satisfied that a case for action under the Act of 1986 is made out and that satisfaction should be reflected from the gang chart and other records. But in this case, the competent authorities, unhesitatingly just paid lip service to the legislative mandate and unfortunately had undertaken the whole exercise of preparation and approval of the gang chart as a ritualistic formality without due application of mind. Thus, the initiation and continuation of the entire criminal proceedings is persecution and harassment of the accused, amounting to be sheer abuse of process of court and in order to otherwise ensure the ends of justice is liable to be quashed.

13. In such view of the matter, the entire criminal proceedings emanating from charge-sheet dated 14.01.2025 and cognizance/summoning order dated 13.02.2025 in Special Trial No. 100 of 2025 (State vs. Raju Patel & Others) in relation to Case Crime No. 61 of 2020, under Section 3(1) of Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, Police Station-Tarkulwa, District-Deoria, which is pending before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 05/Special Judge (Gangster Act), Deoria against the applicant-Saiyad Iltaf Hussain is, hereby, quashed.

14. The Application is, accordingly, allowed. Order Date :- 9.5.2025 #Vik/-

Hon'ble Saurabh Srivastava,J.

1. Heard lerned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State-respondents.

2. The instant Application U/S 528 BNSS has been filed on behalf of the applicant for quashing the entire criminal proceedings dated 14.01.2025 and emanating from charge-sheet cognizance/summoning order dated 13.02.2025 in Special Trial No. 100 of 2025 (State vs. Raju Patel & Others) in relation to Case Crime No. 61 of 2020, under Section 3(1) of Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, Police Station-Tarkulwa, District-Deoria, which is pending before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 05/Special Judge (Gangster Act), Deoria.

3. On the basis of gang-chart prepared/forwarded/approved by the Police and Administrative Authority, FIR was lodged against the applicant and three other co-accused persons. The First Information Report giving rise to the crime, which after investigation, has culminated in the charge-sheet impugned, was submitted against the applicant and three other co-accused persons on 21.03.2020 at Police Station-Tarkulwa, District-Deoria, by opposite party no. 2 with the allegation that applicant has an organized gang wherein he is a gang-leader, whereas three other co-accused are members of the said Gang. It is further alleged in the impugned FIR that applicant is a notorious criminal and has been involved in the offences of murder, kidnapping and extortion for quite sometime and is also obtaining pecuniary gains from the same.

4. It is submitted by the counsel for the applicant that applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case on the basis of mala fide intentions of the police as there is no evidence available on record to show that the applicant is a part of any gang. It is further submitted that impugned FIR was lodged on the basis of a gang- chart, wherein, two cases have been shown against the applicant. It is further submitted that gang-chart prepared in the present case is not at all in consonance with the provisions of Rule 5(3)(c) of the Rules, 2021 as the same dictate that no cases where the accused has been acquitted shall be included in the gang-chart. According to gang-chart attached with the present case, two criminal cases have been shown against the applicant i.e. (i) Case crime No.46 of 2020, under Sections 461, 379, 411, 413 IPC and Section 25 of Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 and (ii) Case Crime No.37 of 2020, under Sections 461, 411, 413 IPC and Section 25 of Indian Telegraph Act, 1885. It is noteworthy that applicant is shown to have been involved in all the two cases cited in the gang-chart wherein applicant has already been enlarged on bail by the court concerned.

5. It is further submitted that according to the provisions of Rule 5(3)(e) of 2021, all the other criminal cases pending against the accused have to be attached with the gang-chart, but in the present case, no such separate list was attached with the gang-chart at the time when the same was approved. It is further contended that there is violation of relevant provisions of Section 2(b) of the Act as well as relevant provisions of Rules, 2021.

6. It is submitted by the learned counsel appearing for the applicant, that even if all allegations in the impugned FIR and charge-sheet are regarded as true, no case under Section 3(1) of Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 is made out against the applicant. In order to support the aforesaid submission, learned counsel has referred to the provisions of the gangster Act of 1986. He submits that there are two essential ingredients to constitute a gang. The two essential ingredients, according to learned counsel for the applicants, are 'violence' or 'disturbance of public order' indulged in by a group of persons, acting either singly or collectively, for the purpose of pecuniary gain etc.

7. It is the learned counsel for the applicants' submission that none of the offences charged against the applicant, either involves violence or the disturbance of public order. Therefore, even if there be allegations about pecuniary gain, the consequences under the Act of 1986 would not be attracted. He next submits that there are two base cases registered against the applicant, on the foot of which the present prosecution has been launched under Section 3(1) of Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, wherein applicant has been enlarged on bail by the court concerned. It is further submitted that the cases allegedly filed against the applicant are regarding the offence/crime committed by him in his private/personal capacity nor as a gang-leader of any gang whatsoever for temporal and pecuniary gains. Therefore, in the submission of the learned counsel, the base cases are not available to provide foundation to the prosecution to pursue the present case under the Act of 1986. It is in the last submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that there is violation of Rules 5, 6, 11, 15, 16, 21, 24 and 26 of The Uttar Pradesh Gangster and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Rules, 2021, vitiating the gang-chart. He has emphasized that non- adherence to these rules has vitiated the basis of registration of the crime and a fortiori the police report and the prosecution. He has emphatically submitted that violation of the aforesaid rules is not mere omission but it shows that the proceedings before registering FIR has been carried out mechanically without giving heed to the provisions of law and rules, which are of fundamental importance as any false and malicious prosecution entails serious consequences resulting into the deprivation of life and personal liberty of the accused person, which cannot be deprived except for the procedure established by law as is enshrined in the Article 21 of the Constitution of India. The forwarding, recommending and approving authorities have not paid any heed or attention to relevant law and rules, while exercising their authority with regard to the preparation and approval of the gang-chart. The whole exercise on their part has been carried out without application of mind.

8. On the other hand, learned AGA vehemently opposed the aforesaid contentions and submits that applicant is a leader of the gang, who is involved in committing the anti-social activities and crimes for pecuniary and temporal gains, but he could not dispute the violation of aforesaid Rules.

9. Considering the instant case in the light of the provisions of the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 and relevant Rules, it is evident that the gang chart in this case has been approved summarily without applying its mind as is apparent from the perusal of the gang chart. From the material available on record, it is apparent that the gang-chart was prepared, in which two cases are shown as base cases, which are as (i) Case crime No.46 of 2020, under Sections 461, 379, 411, 413 IPC and Section 25 of Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 and (ii) Case Crime No.37 of 2020, under Sections 461, 411, 413 IPC and Section 25 of Indian Telegraph Act, 1885. As from the record, it is clear that these above two case are apparently committed in private and personal capacity and the same do not come within the purview of the gangsterism. Furthermore there is no specific mention of offences which have been committed for pecuniary, materialistic and temporal or similar benefits or which disturbs the public order as per Rule 13. Furthermore, quick forwarding action has been taken in this case without caring for the compliance of the relevant procedural safeguards. There should be satisfaction recorded to the effect that there is just and legal basis for taking action under the Act and there is satisfactory basis for pursuing the case. The satisfaction so recorded should be there by using the mind independently but in the instant case the same is missing.

10. Considering the aforesaid submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties as well as perusal of records, it is evident from the records that at the time of approving the gang-chart, District Magistrate did not apply his mind as no reasons are recorded by him, resultantly, the lodging of FIR under Gangster Act is with malafide intention, in specific violation of procedural safeguards. It is further evident that the approving authority acted mechanically and the whole exercise lacks application of mind on the parts of the authorities concerned. The applicant has fundamental rights to life which include to live with honour and dignity and fundamental right of under Article 21 of the Constitution of India cannot be interfered with lightly. The applicant has been deprived of his liberty by the mechanical exercise/procedure undertaken on the part of the authorities concerned.

11. The procedural compliance in cases of gangster Act is of utmost importance, departure from the due process of law will give chance and provide fodder to the vested interests with singular agenda to spread false narratives. Verily, gangsterism poses an ominous threat to public order. Vile and abhorrent acts of gangsterism do evoke collective societal anger and anguish. While the war against gangsterism must be waged by the State with unwavering resolve but a civil democratic society can ill afford sacrificing the procedural safeguards provided under the law, and which is an integrated facet of the due process of law, at the altar of perceived peril to public order. "The Siren Song that the 'end justifies the means', and that the procedural safeguards are subservient to the overwhelming need to ensure that the accused is prosecuted and punished, must be muzzled by voice of Rule of Law."

12. For all the reasons recorded above, the court is of the view that at the stage of preparing and approving the gang-chart on the basis of materials placed, the competent Authorities should have satisfied themselves that there is a legal basis and justification for taking and pursuing action against the accused under the Act of 1986. At the stage of approval of the gang-chart, the approving Authority has to be satisfied that a case for action under the Act of 1986 is made out and that satisfaction should be reflected from the gang chart and other records. But in this case, the competent authorities, unhesitatingly just paid lip service to the legislative mandate and unfortunately had undertaken the whole exercise of preparation and approval of the gang chart as a ritualistic formality without due application of mind. Thus, the initiation and continuation of the entire criminal proceedings is persecution and harassment of the accused, amounting to be sheer abuse of process of court and in order to otherwise ensure the ends of justice is liable to be quashed.

13. In such view of the matter, the entire criminal proceedings emanating from charge-sheet dated 14.01.2025 and cognizance/summoning order dated 13.02.2025 in Special Trial No. 100 of 2025 (State vs. Raju Patel & Others) in relation to Case Crime No. 61 of 2020, under Section 3(1) of Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, Police Station-Tarkulwa, District-Deoria, which is pending before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 05/Special Judge (Gangster Act), Deoria against the applicant-Saiyad Iltaf Hussain is, hereby, quashed.

14. The Application is, accordingly, allowed. Order Date :- 9.5.2025 #Vik/-