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

HON'BLE SAURABH SRIVASTAVA, J.

1. Heard learned counsel for applicant and learned AGA for State.

2. Present application has been preferred with prayer to quash the entire proceeding of Session Case no. 984 of 2022 (State Vs. Shyam Sharan Sharma and others), arising out of Case Crime no. 214/202, under Section 3(1) of U.P.Gangster & Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, PS- Bidhuna, District- Kanpur Nagar, pending before learned Special Judge, Gangster Act, Kanpur Nagar in respect of applicant. It is also prayed to quash the charge sheet no. 168/2022 dated 12.05.2022 and summoning order dated 14.07.2022 passed by learned Special Judge, Gangster Act, Kanpur Nagar in the said case in respect of applicant.

3. Learned counsel for applicant has submitted that provisions of Gangster Act has been invoked against applicant on the basis of solitary case i.e. Case Crime No. 165 of 2021, registered on 19.05.2021 under section 302 IPC, wherein the applicant has already been enlarged on bail. Learned counsel for applicant has further submitted that in the base case, applicant has been made an accused for committing murder of his wife who was living separately as per settlement deed, and even if it is assumed for a moment that the said offence has been committed by applicant, the same would be come under the personal enmity and not for the purpose of disturbing public order or committed by causing violence or threat or coercion or otherwise for the purpose of obtaining unfair trustworthy, pecuniary, economic, material or other advantage and as such, applicant will not come under the definition of gangster as mentioned 2(b) of the Gangster Act, 1986. Learned 2 NA528 No. 23738 of 2025 counsel for applicant has submitted that entire allegation against the applicant failed to disclose whether, any act of violence, threat, show of violence, intimidation, or coercion was resorted to for achieving the said object by the applicant.

4. Learned counsel for applicant has also 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).

5. Per contra, learned AGA vehemently opposed the prayer sought through instant application and rebutted the stands taken up by learned counsel for applicants.

6. 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): "20. The definition of "gang" under Section 2(b) of the Act of 1986 comprises the following essentials; i. A group of persons i.e., there can be no gang of one person; ii. The group of persons, acting either individually or collectively, indulges in anti-social activities as enumerated in clauses (i) to (xxv) of Section 2(b); iii. Indulgence in such anti-social activities is by means of violence, or threat, or show of violence, or intimidation, or coercion, or otherwise; iv. Use of such means is with the object of disturbing public order, or gaining any undue temporal, pecuniary, material or other advantage for himself or any other person. ... 3 NA528 No. 23738 of 2025 ...

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 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 4 NA528 No. 23738 of 2025 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. (Emphasis Supplied)

16. 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) and 16(3) Gangster Rules, 2021.

17. In view of aforementioned facts and circumstances, entire proceeding of Session Case no. 984 of 2022 (State Vs. Shyam Sharan Sharma and others), arising out of Case Crime no. 214/202, under Section 3(1) of U.P.Gangster & Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, PS- Bidhuna, District- Kanpur Nagar, pending before learned Special Judge, Gangster Act, Kanpur Nagar along with charge sheet no. 168/2022 dated 12.05.2022 and summoning order dated 14.07.2022 passed in the said case, are hereby quashed only in respect of applicant only.

18. The instant application stands allowed accordingly.

19. 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 4, 2025 Vivek Kr. (Saurabh Srivastava,J.) VIVEK KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

HON'BLE SAURABH SRIVASTAVA, J.

1. Heard learned counsel for applicant and learned AGA for State.

2. Present application has been preferred with prayer to quash the entire proceeding of Session Case no. 984 of 2022 (State Vs. Shyam Sharan Sharma and others), arising out of Case Crime no. 214/202, under Section 3(1) of U.P.Gangster & Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, PS- Bidhuna, District- Kanpur Nagar, pending before learned Special Judge, Gangster Act, Kanpur Nagar in respect of applicant. It is also prayed to quash the charge sheet no. 168/2022 dated 12.05.2022 and summoning order dated 14.07.2022 passed by learned Special Judge, Gangster Act, Kanpur Nagar in the said case in respect of applicant.

3. Learned counsel for applicant has submitted that provisions of Gangster Act has been invoked against applicant on the basis of solitary case i.e. Case Crime No. 165 of 2021, registered on 19.05.2021 under section 302 IPC, wherein the applicant has already been enlarged on bail. Learned counsel for applicant has further submitted that in the base case, applicant has been made an accused for committing murder of his wife who was living separately as per settlement deed, and even if it is assumed for a moment that the said offence has been committed by applicant, the same would be come under the personal enmity and not for the purpose of disturbing public order or committed by causing violence or threat or coercion or otherwise for the purpose of obtaining unfair trustworthy, pecuniary, economic, material or other advantage and as such, applicant will not come under the definition of gangster as mentioned 2(b) of the Gangster Act, 1986. Learned 2 NA528 No. 23738 of 2025 counsel for applicant has submitted that entire allegation against the applicant failed to disclose whether, any act of violence, threat, show of violence, intimidation, or coercion was resorted to for achieving the said object by the applicant.

4. Learned counsel for applicant has also 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).

5. Per contra, learned AGA vehemently opposed the prayer sought through instant application and rebutted the stands taken up by learned counsel for applicants.

6. 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): "20. The definition of "gang" under Section 2(b) of the Act of 1986 comprises the following essentials; i. A group of persons i.e., there can be no gang of one person; ii. The group of persons, acting either individually or collectively, indulges in anti-social activities as enumerated in clauses (i) to (xxv) of Section 2(b); iii. Indulgence in such anti-social activities is by means of violence, or threat, or show of violence, or intimidation, or coercion, or otherwise; iv. Use of such means is with the object of disturbing public order, or gaining any undue temporal, pecuniary, material or other advantage for himself or any other person. ... 3 NA528 No. 23738 of 2025 ...

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 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 4 NA528 No. 23738 of 2025 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. (Emphasis Supplied)

16. 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) and 16(3) Gangster Rules, 2021.

17. In view of aforementioned facts and circumstances, entire proceeding of Session Case no. 984 of 2022 (State Vs. Shyam Sharan Sharma and others), arising out of Case Crime no. 214/202, under Section 3(1) of U.P.Gangster & Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, PS- Bidhuna, District- Kanpur Nagar, pending before learned Special Judge, Gangster Act, Kanpur Nagar along with charge sheet no. 168/2022 dated 12.05.2022 and summoning order dated 14.07.2022 passed in the said case, are hereby quashed only in respect of applicant only.

18. The instant application stands allowed accordingly.

19. 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 4, 2025 Vivek Kr. (Saurabh Srivastava,J.) VIVEK KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad