High Court
Case Details
Court No. - 46 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 1008 of 2023 Petitioner :- Monu Gupta Alias Avadhesh Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Bipin Kumar Tripathi Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Anjani Kumar Mishra,J. Hon'ble Gajendra Kumar,J. This writ petition has been filed with a prayer to quash the impugned F.I.R. dated 17.10.2022, registered as Case Crime No.319 of 2022, under section 3(1) of U.P. Gangsters and Anti- Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, Police Station Khajani, District Gorakhpur.
Legal Reasoning
The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner is named in the F.I.R. lodged by the respondent No.4 on 17.10.2022 which has been registered as Case Crime No.319 of 2022, under Section 3(1) of U.P. Gangster and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, (hereinafter referred to as the 'Gangster Act') Police Station Khajani, District Gorakhpur. As per the allegations of FIR, there is a gang of four persons namely, Monu Gupta @ Awadhesh, Suraj Sharma, Golu Gaur and Piyush Sharma who were involved in anti-social activities under section 3(1) of the Gangster Act. The criminal antecedent of the persons have also been categorically mentioned, which reads as under:- 1- Monu Gupta @ Awadhesh- Case Crime no.121 of 2022, under Section 392, 411 IPC, Police Station- Khajani, District- Gorakhpur and Case Crime no.136 of 2022, under sections 392, 411 IPC, Police Station- Khajani, District-Gorakhpur, Case Crime No. 147 of 2022, under Sections 394, 411 Police Station- Khajani, District-Gorakhpur; 2- Suraj Sharma- Case Crime no.121 of 2022, under section 392, 411 I.P.C., Police Station- Khajani, District-Gorakhpur, Case Crime No. 136 of 2022, under Sections 392, 411 Police Station- Khajani, District-Gorakhpur, Case Crime No. 147 of 2022, under Sections 394, 411 Police Station- Khajani, District- Gorakhpur; 3-Golu Gaur- Case Crime no.121 of 2022 under Section 392, 411 IPC, Police Station- Khajani, District- Gorakhpur, Case Crime no.136 of 2022 under Section 392, 411 IPC, Police Station- Khajani, District- Gorakhpur, Case Crime no.147 of 2022 under Section 394, 411 IPC, Police Station- Khajani, District- Gorakhpur; 4-Piyush Sharma- Case Crime no.121 of 2022 under Sections 392, 411 IPC, Police Station- Khajani, District- Gorakhpur, Case Crime no.136 of 2022 under Section 392, 411 IPC, Police Station- Khajani, District- Gorakhpur; A gang chart of the same has also been annexed herein.
Legal Reasoning
Heard Sri Bipin Kumar Tripathi, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned AGA for the State. The learned counsel for the petitioner argued that that petitioner has been falsely implicated in the aforesaid case crime number. It has been submitted that FIR was registered as Case Crime nos.121 of 2022, 136 of 2022 & 147 of 2022, under sections 392, 411, 394 I.P.C., Police Station- Khajani, District- Gorakhpur against the petitioner (three unknown persons). The investigation of the case was conducted by the Investigating Officer and final report was submitted. It is further submitted that the petitioner has attained the age of 18 years on 16.06.2022 and before attaining the age of majority, the petitioner was arrested on 25.05.2022 in pursuance of Case Crime No. 147 of 2022 and on the basis of single arrest memo, he was implicated in two other cases giving rise to Case Crime Nos. 121 of 2022 & 136 of 2022 registered at same police station as in those cases, none was named as an accused and, as such, the petitioner was compelled to made confession to the effect of participating in those previous cases. Nothing has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner. It is further submitted that after arrest of the petitioner in the aforesaid case crime number, the petitioner has been enlarged on bail by the court concerned and, thereafter, declared juvenile in previous cases mentioned in the gang chart. It is next submitted that the cases mentioned in the gang chart have taken place before attaining the age of majority. The name of the petitioner surfaced during the course of investigation. The petitioner took the plea of being juvenile, he was released on bail. The respondent no.4 has lodged the present FIR showing the petitioner as a member of a Gang. He further submitted that at the time of incident he was juvenile. Moreover, in the said case he was declared juvenile. Thereafter, the present FIR has been lodged against petitioner under Gangster Act on the basis of three cases. Learned counsel for the petitioner further referred to Sections 1(4), 17, 19 and 21 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 which extends ample protection and benefit to a juvenile, submitting that the petitioner has been implicated in Gangster Act after attaining majority, on the premise of three cases, in which he was declared juvenile. Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for quashing the FIR and submitted that according to the Gang Chart the petitioner has a criminal history of three cases and according to the Adhaar Card of the petitioner, his date of birth is 16.06.2004 and as such on the date of incident, the petitioner was more than 18 years of age. We have considered the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. It is not disputed that the petitioner has been declared juvenile and the said cases are the sole premise of his being booked in Gangster Act. In this context the relevant provisions of Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 may be taken into consideration: "Section 1(4): Short title, extent, commencement and application- Notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force, the provisions of this Act shall apply to all cases involving detention, prosecution, penalty or sentence of imprisonment of juveniles in conflict with law under any such law. Section 17: Proceedings under Chapter VIII of the Code of Criminal Procedure not competent against juvenile- Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) no proceeding shall be instituted and no order shall be passed against the juvenile under Chapter VIII of the said Code. Section 19: Removal of disqualification attaching to conviction- (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in any other law, a juvenile who has committed an offence and has been dealt with under the provisions of this Act shall not suffer disqualification, if any, attaching to a conviction of an offence under such law. (2) The Board shall make an order directing that the relevant records of such conviction shall be removed after the expiry of the period of appeal or a reasonable period as prescribed under the rules, as the case may be. Section 21: Prohibition of publication of name, etc., of juvenile in conflict with law or child in need of care and protection involved in any proceeding under the Act- (1) No report in any newspapers, magazine, news-sheet or visual media of any inquiry regarding a juvenile in conflict with law or a child in need of care and protection under this Act shall disclose the name, address or school or any other particulars calculated to lead to the identification of the juvenile or child nor shall any picture of any such juvenile or child be published." The Juvenile Act is intended to protect the juvenile from the rigours of trial by a criminal court. It prohibits sentencing of a juvenile and committing him to prison. The act further extends protection to a juvenile from proceedings under Chapter VIII of Cr.P.C. and also prohibits newspapers, magazines etc. to disclose the particulars which may lead to identification of the juvenile. As its preamble suggests it seeks to adopt a child- friendly approach in the adjudication and disposition of the matters, in the best interest of children and for their ultimate rehabilitation. The petitioner was not named in Case Crime No.147 of 2022, under Sections 394 and 411 IPC. He was arrested in pursuance of the aforesaid case on 25.05.2022. The date on which, he was minor as his date of birth was 16.06.2004. He attained age of majority i.e. 18 years on 16.06.2022. On the basis of single arrest memo, he was implicated in two other cases on the basis of confessional statement, but nothing was recovered from the possession of the petitioner. Petitioner was declared juvenile and has been bailed out in all the three cases. Therefore, in all the base cases at the time of the commission, the petitioner being juvenile at the time of Case Crime No.147/2022, protection and benefit under J.J. Act is certainly to be extended to him and F.I.R. under section 3(1) Gangster Act on the premise of such cases cannot be approved. Where the legislation provides so much protection and benefit to a juvenile, we do not conform with a view of impugned F.I.R. and its registration against the petitioner under Section 3(1) of Gangsters Act. Thus, impugned F.I.R. is hereby quashed.
Decision
The writ petition, accordingly, succeeds and is allowed. No order as to the cost. Order Date :- 1.2.2023 Sanjeet Digitally signed by :- SANJEET KUMAR YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad