State of U.P. and Another vs Party(s)

: Ankit Srivastava, Sr. Advocate : G.A. Court No. - 77 HON'BLE SAURABH SRIVASTAVA, J. Order on Crl. Misc. Modification Application

1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. Present application has been preferred with prayer to "modify order dated

29.05.2025 passed by this Court."

3. Learned counsel for applicant submitted that on dated 29.05.2025, this Court was pleased to pass an order whereby present matter was directed to be connected with Crl. Misc. Writ Petition no. 1049 of 2024, as the Court was apparently under the impression that the subject matter of both the cases was identical or similar. In fact, the legal issue involved in instant matter are entirely distinct from Crl. Misc. Writ Petition no. 1049 of 2024. There is nothing common in the case which would justify clubbing or connection. The issue involved in the connected matter are regulatory and procedural in nature, dealing with scope and operation of certain Rules of 2021, in contrast, present matter challenges the very initiation of proceedings under a statutory act, and as such order dated 29.05.2025 may be modified to the extent that present matter be de-tagged with Crl. Misc. Writ Petition no. 1049 of 2024.

4. Learned AGA could not dispute the aforesaid arguments.

5. After having the arguments raised by learned counsel for the parties and going through the order dated 29.05.2025 passed by this Court along with pleadings available in the record, it is crystal clear that order of some other 2 NA528 No. 19538 of 2025 case has been transcribed in the instant matter and as such, modification application stands allowed and present matter is hereby de-tagged with Crl. Misc. Writ Petition no. 1049 of 2024. Order on Petition

6. Present application has been preferred with prayer to quash the entire proceeding of Special S.T. No. 40 of 2022 (State Vs. Subhash Chandra Patel and others), arising out of Case Crime no. 278/2020, under Section 2/3(1) of U.P.Gangster & Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, PS- Shivkuti, District- Prayagraj, pending before learned Additional District Judge- II/Special Judge, Gangster Act, Prayagraj in respect of applicant. It is also prayed to quash the charge sheet no. 86/2022 dated 27.05.2022 and learned cognizance/summoning order dated 23.07.2022 passed by Additional District Judge-II/Special Judge, Gangster Act, Prayagraj in the said case in respect of applicant.

7. Learned counsel for applicant has argued that by bare perusal of the gang chart, it is apparent that the same has been prepared in violation of the mandatory rules i.e. Rule 5(3)(a) and 16(3) as provided under the Gangster Rules, 2021 since neither there was no joint meeting conducted while preparation of gang-chart nor there is any reasonable finding recorded by approving authority, whereas the authorities concerned have merely signed on the gang-chart without applying their independent minds. In support of his contentions, learned counsel for applicant has relied upon the latest judgment rendered by Hon'ble the Apex Court in the case of Vinod Bihari Lal Versus State of U.P. and another (Criminal Appeal nos. 777-778 of 2025, decided on 23.05.202).

8. Learned counsel for applicant has also submitted that although, the gang- chart of present proceeding has been approved in year 2020 and the Gangster Rules were framed in the year 2021 but the same Rule is applicable in the instant matter and highlighted paragraph no. 20 of order dated 28.08.2023 passed by co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Application u/s 482 no. 38502 of 2018 (Rajiv Agrawal vs. State of U.P. and another) wherein, Government Order dated 02.01.2004 is available and it is submitted that under point no. 3 of the instructions, it is clearly mentioned that gang-chart is to be finally approved in joint discussion of District Magistrate along with Senior Superintendent of Police/Superintendent of Police.

9. Per contra, learned AGA vehemently opposed the prayer sought through instant application and rebutted the stands taken up by learned counsel for 3 NA528 No. 19538 of 2025 applicants.

10. Before arriving over any conclusion, it is apt to reproduce certain paragraphs of the judgment relied upon by learned counsel for applicant, rendered by Hon'ble the Apex Court in case of Vinod Bihari Lal (supra): "44. Rule 5(3)(a) stipulates that a gang chart shall be approved only after due discussion in a joint meeting comprising the District Magistrate, Commissioner of Police, Senior Superintendent of Police, Superintendent of Police, and not through a summary process. ... ...

47. Furthermore, upon receipt of the gang chart along with all the requisite forms, the Commissioner of Police/District Magistrate is required to thoroughly examine all the facts afresh and, only upon being satisfied that sufficient grounds exist to proceed, may approve the gang chart. The recorded satisfaction must clearly reflect Commissioner of Police/District Magistrate has scrutinized the gang- chart and the accompanying forms in light of the evidence annexed thereto. ... ...

49. Rule 17 mandates that the competent authority must exercise its independent mind while forwarding the gang-chart. It unequivocally prohibits the use of pre-printed gang-charts, thereby making impermissible for the authority to mechanically affix its signature. The underlying objective of this prohibition is to ensure that the competent authority undertakes a conscious and reasoned application of mind, rather than merely endorsing a pre-prepared document. Such a safeguard is integral to preserving the procedural sanctity of the law and preventing arbitrary or perfunctory approvals that may adversely affect the rights and liberties of individuals. ... ...

51. The satisfaction of the approving authority is sine qua non for taking action under the Act of 1986. It is indispensable for the approving authority to record his satisfaction in his own words, to indicate application of mind before approving the gang-chart. The recording of 4 NA528 No. 19538 of 2025 satisfaction need not be exhaustive, because at the stage of approval the investigation under the Act of 1986 is yet to be conducted, but it must be independent, indicating the reasons justifying the exercise of jurisdiction under the Act of 1986. ... ...

56. Upon perusal of the material on record, more particularly the gang- chart, it is abundantly clear that the said gang-chart was approved by the competent authority merely by affixing his signature on a pre-printed gang-chart, an act that reflects nothing short of a complete non- application of mind and constitutes a violation of Rules 16 and 17 of the Rules of 2021 respectively. At the cost of repetition, we would like to reiterate that the recommending, forwarding, and approving authority are not mere rubber-stamping entities.

11. From aforesaid discussions, it is apparent that present case is squarely covered with judgment rendered by Hon'ble the Apex Court in case of Vinod Bihar Lal (supra) since on perusal of gang-chart, it is apparent that the gang-chart has been approved summarily without due compliance of Rule 5(3)(a), 16 and 17 Gangster Rules, 2021.

12. In view of aforementioned facts and circumstances, entire proceeding of Special S.T. No. 40 of 2022 (State Vs. Subhash Chandra Patel and others), arising out of Case Crime no. 278/2020, under Section 2/3(1) of U.P.Gangster & Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, PS- Shivkuti, District- Prayagraj, pending before learned Additional District Judge- II/Special Judge, Gangster Act, Prayagraj, along with charge sheet no. 86/2022 dated 27.05.2022 and cognizance/summoning order dated 23.07.2022 passed in the said case, are hereby quashed only in respect of applicant herein.

13. The instant application stands allowed accordingly.

14. However, the above mentioned order will not preclude the concerned authorities for re-initiation of the proceedings against applicant, if required, in accordance with law. September 16, 2025 Vivek Kr. (Saurabh Srivastava,J.) VIVEK KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

: Ankit Srivastava, Sr. Advocate : G.A. Court No. - 77 HON'BLE SAURABH SRIVASTAVA, J. Order on Crl. Misc. Modification Application

1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. Present application has been preferred with prayer to "modify order dated

29.05.2025 passed by this Court."

3. Learned counsel for applicant submitted that on dated 29.05.2025, this Court was pleased to pass an order whereby present matter was directed to be connected with Crl. Misc. Writ Petition no. 1049 of 2024, as the Court was apparently under the impression that the subject matter of both the cases was identical or similar. In fact, the legal issue involved in instant matter are entirely distinct from Crl. Misc. Writ Petition no. 1049 of 2024. There is nothing common in the case which would justify clubbing or connection. The issue involved in the connected matter are regulatory and procedural in nature, dealing with scope and operation of certain Rules of 2021, in contrast, present matter challenges the very initiation of proceedings under a statutory act, and as such order dated 29.05.2025 may be modified to the extent that present matter be de-tagged with Crl. Misc. Writ Petition no. 1049 of 2024.

4. Learned AGA could not dispute the aforesaid arguments.

5. After having the arguments raised by learned counsel for the parties and going through the order dated 29.05.2025 passed by this Court along with pleadings available in the record, it is crystal clear that order of some other 2 NA528 No. 19538 of 2025 case has been transcribed in the instant matter and as such, modification application stands allowed and present matter is hereby de-tagged with Crl. Misc. Writ Petition no. 1049 of 2024. Order on Petition

6. Present application has been preferred with prayer to quash the entire proceeding of Special S.T. No. 40 of 2022 (State Vs. Subhash Chandra Patel and others), arising out of Case Crime no. 278/2020, under Section 2/3(1) of U.P.Gangster & Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, PS- Shivkuti, District- Prayagraj, pending before learned Additional District Judge- II/Special Judge, Gangster Act, Prayagraj in respect of applicant. It is also prayed to quash the charge sheet no. 86/2022 dated 27.05.2022 and learned cognizance/summoning order dated 23.07.2022 passed by Additional District Judge-II/Special Judge, Gangster Act, Prayagraj in the said case in respect of applicant.

7. Learned counsel for applicant has argued that by bare perusal of the gang chart, it is apparent that the same has been prepared in violation of the mandatory rules i.e. Rule 5(3)(a) and 16(3) as provided under the Gangster Rules, 2021 since neither there was no joint meeting conducted while preparation of gang-chart nor there is any reasonable finding recorded by approving authority, whereas the authorities concerned have merely signed on the gang-chart without applying their independent minds. In support of his contentions, learned counsel for applicant has relied upon the latest judgment rendered by Hon'ble the Apex Court in the case of Vinod Bihari Lal Versus State of U.P. and another (Criminal Appeal nos. 777-778 of 2025, decided on 23.05.202).

8. Learned counsel for applicant has also submitted that although, the gang- chart of present proceeding has been approved in year 2020 and the Gangster Rules were framed in the year 2021 but the same Rule is applicable in the instant matter and highlighted paragraph no. 20 of order dated 28.08.2023 passed by co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Application u/s 482 no. 38502 of 2018 (Rajiv Agrawal vs. State of U.P. and another) wherein, Government Order dated 02.01.2004 is available and it is submitted that under point no. 3 of the instructions, it is clearly mentioned that gang-chart is to be finally approved in joint discussion of District Magistrate along with Senior Superintendent of Police/Superintendent of Police.

9. Per contra, learned AGA vehemently opposed the prayer sought through instant application and rebutted the stands taken up by learned counsel for 3 NA528 No. 19538 of 2025 applicants.

10. Before arriving over any conclusion, it is apt to reproduce certain paragraphs of the judgment relied upon by learned counsel for applicant, rendered by Hon'ble the Apex Court in case of Vinod Bihari Lal (supra): "44. Rule 5(3)(a) stipulates that a gang chart shall be approved only after due discussion in a joint meeting comprising the District Magistrate, Commissioner of Police, Senior Superintendent of Police, Superintendent of Police, and not through a summary process. ... ...

47. Furthermore, upon receipt of the gang chart along with all the requisite forms, the Commissioner of Police/District Magistrate is required to thoroughly examine all the facts afresh and, only upon being satisfied that sufficient grounds exist to proceed, may approve the gang chart. The recorded satisfaction must clearly reflect Commissioner of Police/District Magistrate has scrutinized the gang- chart and the accompanying forms in light of the evidence annexed thereto. ... ...

49. Rule 17 mandates that the competent authority must exercise its independent mind while forwarding the gang-chart. It unequivocally prohibits the use of pre-printed gang-charts, thereby making impermissible for the authority to mechanically affix its signature. The underlying objective of this prohibition is to ensure that the competent authority undertakes a conscious and reasoned application of mind, rather than merely endorsing a pre-prepared document. Such a safeguard is integral to preserving the procedural sanctity of the law and preventing arbitrary or perfunctory approvals that may adversely affect the rights and liberties of individuals. ... ...

51. The satisfaction of the approving authority is sine qua non for taking action under the Act of 1986. It is indispensable for the approving authority to record his satisfaction in his own words, to indicate application of mind before approving the gang-chart. The recording of 4 NA528 No. 19538 of 2025 satisfaction need not be exhaustive, because at the stage of approval the investigation under the Act of 1986 is yet to be conducted, but it must be independent, indicating the reasons justifying the exercise of jurisdiction under the Act of 1986. ... ...

56. Upon perusal of the material on record, more particularly the gang- chart, it is abundantly clear that the said gang-chart was approved by the competent authority merely by affixing his signature on a pre-printed gang-chart, an act that reflects nothing short of a complete non- application of mind and constitutes a violation of Rules 16 and 17 of the Rules of 2021 respectively. At the cost of repetition, we would like to reiterate that the recommending, forwarding, and approving authority are not mere rubber-stamping entities.

11. From aforesaid discussions, it is apparent that present case is squarely covered with judgment rendered by Hon'ble the Apex Court in case of Vinod Bihar Lal (supra) since on perusal of gang-chart, it is apparent that the gang-chart has been approved summarily without due compliance of Rule 5(3)(a), 16 and 17 Gangster Rules, 2021.

12. In view of aforementioned facts and circumstances, entire proceeding of Special S.T. No. 40 of 2022 (State Vs. Subhash Chandra Patel and others), arising out of Case Crime no. 278/2020, under Section 2/3(1) of U.P.Gangster & Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, PS- Shivkuti, District- Prayagraj, pending before learned Additional District Judge- II/Special Judge, Gangster Act, Prayagraj, along with charge sheet no. 86/2022 dated 27.05.2022 and cognizance/summoning order dated 23.07.2022 passed in the said case, are hereby quashed only in respect of applicant herein.

13. The instant application stands allowed accordingly.

14. However, the above mentioned order will not preclude the concerned authorities for re-initiation of the proceedings against applicant, if required, in accordance with law. September 16, 2025 Vivek Kr. (Saurabh Srivastava,J.) VIVEK KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad