(State v. Umesh Gupta), arising out of Case Crime No.1

4. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that applicant has been implicated in other cases mentioned as criminal history due to ulterior motive and the case under the Gangster Act was imposed upon applicant in the year 2023 whereas the property of applicant which was attached vide order dated 07.07.2023 passed by concerned authority under section 14 (1) of U.P. Gangster Act which was acquired by wife of applicant much earlier to the imposition of Gangster Act upon him i.e. in the year

5. Learned counsel for applicant further submitted that the concerned authority has wrongly and incorrectly attached the house of applicant on the wrong presumption that the said property has been acquired from the income earned by applicant by involving in anti social activities, whereas applicant is neither Gangster nor he has earned that property from involving in anti social activities.

6. Clarifying the position, it has been urged by the learned counsel for applicant that as a matter of fact, applicant was an auto driver and the property in question was not in the name of applicant rather the same was in the name of his wife, namely, Ritu Gupta and the said house was only in the possession of applicant on the basis of power of attorney executed by his father and moreso the said house was purchased by his father. It has also been submitted by the learned counsel for applicant that without considering all these relevant facts and documentary evidence, passed the impugned orders on wrong premise with oblique motive.

7. Learned counsel for applicant further submitted that the concerned authority has rejected his objection vide impugned order dated 14.06.2024 incorrectly by presuming that the property in question has been acquired by applicant from the income earned by indulging in anti social activities without going through documentary evidence filed on behalf of applicant and wrongly interpreting that applicant has not filed any document to prove that the property in question has not been acquired from the income

3. earned by indulging in anti social activities and as such, impugned order may be set aside.

8. Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer sought through the instant applicant and submitted that the order impugned has been passed after being fully satisfied that applicant has acquired the property in question by illegal means involving himself in anti social activities as defined under the Gangster Act, as such there is no illegality, infirmity or perversity in the impugned order. Learned AGA further submitted that applicant was also not able to show the source of income from which he had acquired the property in question.

9. I have heard the rival submissions extended by learned counsel for parties and perused all the material available on record.

10. It seems to be just and expedient to refer to the relevant provisions of the Gangster Act which are as under :- "2. Definitions- In this Act,- (a) "Code" means the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973; (b) "Gang" means a group of persons, who acting either singly or collectively, by violence, or threat or show of violence, or intimidation, or coercion or otherwise with the object of disturbing public order or of gaining any undue temporal, pecuniary, material or other advantage for himself or any other person, indulge in anti- social activities, namely- (i) offences punishable under Chapter XVI, or Chapter XVII, or Chapter XXII of the Indian Penal Code, or (ii) distilling or manufacturing or storing or transporting or importing or exporting or selling or distributing any liquor, or intoxicating or dangerous drugs, or other intoxicants or narcotics or cultivating any plant, in contravention of any of the provisions of the U.P. Excise Act, 1910 or the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 or any other law for the time being in force, (iii) occupying or taking possession of immovable property otherwise than in accordance with law, or setting-up false claims, for title or possession of immovable property whether in himself or any other person, or

4. (iv) preventing or attempting to prevent any public servant or any witness from discharging his lawful duties, or (v) offences punishable under the Suppression of Immoral Traffic in Women and Girls Act, 1956, or (vi) offences punishable under Section 3 of the Public Gambling Act, 1867, or (vii) preventing any person from offering bids in auction lawfully conducted, or tender, lawfully invited, by or on behalf of any Government department, local body or public or private undertaking, for any lease or rights or supply of goods or work to be done, or (viii) preventing or disturbing the smooth running by any person of his lawful business, profession, trade or employment or any other lawful activity connected therewith, or (ix) offences punishable under Section 171-E of the Indian Penal Code, or in preventing or obstructing any public election being lawfully held, by physically preventing the voter from exercising his electoral rights, or (x) inciting others to resort to violence to disturb communal harmony, or (xi) creating panic, alarm or terror in public, or (xii) terrorising or assaulting employees or owners or occupiers of public or private undertakings or factories and causing mischief in respect of their properties, or (xiii) inducing or attempting to induce any person to go to foreign countries on false representation that any employment, trade or profession shall be provided to him in such foreign country, or (xiv) kidnapping or abducting any person with intent to extort ransom, or (xv) diverting or otherwise preventing any aircraft or public transport vehicle from following its scheduled course; *(xvi) offences punishable under the Regulation of Money Lending Act, 1976; (xvii) illegally transporting and/or smuggling of cattle and indulging in acts in contravention of the provisions in the Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act, 1955 and the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960; (xviii) human trafficking for purposes of commercial exploitation, bonded labour, child labour, sexual exploitation, organ removing

5. and trafficking, beggary and the like activities; (xix) offences punishable under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1966; (xx) printing, transporting and circulating of fake Indian currency notes; (xxi) involving in production, sale and distribution of spurious drugs; (xxii) involving in manufacture, sale and transportation of arms and ammunition in contravention of Sections 5, 7 and 12 of the Arms Act, 1959; (xxiii) felling or killing for economic gains, smuggling of products in contravention of the Indian Forest Act, 1927 and The Wildlife Protection Act, 1972; (xxiv) offences punishable under the Entertainment and Betting Tax Act, 1979; (xvv) indulging in crimes that impact security of State, public order and even tempo of life,"

11. Further, on perusal of the offences which have been included in the definition of Gang includes offences under Chapter-XVII of Indian Penal Code which include the offence of theft under Section 378, offences under Section 403 and the related sections dealing with criminal misappropriation of property, Section 405 and allied sections deals with the crime of criminal breach of trust, dishonest misappropriation of property. Section 410 and related sections concern stolen property, Section 420 and related sections deal with offences of cheating which only involve deception, fraudulent or dishonest inducement to a person or his property. It is evident from the provisions included within the definition of gang do not require existence of force or violence. Similarly, offences under Section 3 of U.P. Public Gambling Act may not necessarily involve the use of force. Thus, the word ''otherwise' has been employed disjunctively in the definition of gang and cannot be read as "ejusdem generis", with other incidents of violence mentioned in the earlier part of this sub-section (Verneet Kumar vs. State of U.P. 2009 (1) ALL CrJ 377).

12. In the case in hand, the cases which were shown as criminal history against applicant, are related to the offences under Sections 379, 420, 392 IPC meaning thereby, applicant was involved in disturbing public order or of gaining any undue temporal, pecuniary, material or other advantage for himself. In sofar as property in question was owned in the year 2003 but as per the police report which shows that without having source of income, about Rs.90,00,000/- has been spent by applicant for furnishing as well as for modernization of the property in question meaning thereby, the said works has been done by the money earned by illegal means.

13. In view thereof, the Court finds that objection rejected by concerned authority after considering each and every material available before it and as such, there is no infirmity or illegality in the order impugned.

14. Accordingly, the instant application stands dismissed. Order Date :- 8.4.2025 #Vik/- (Saurabh Srivastava, J.) VIKRAM GUPTA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

4. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that applicant has been implicated in other cases mentioned as criminal history due to ulterior motive and the case under the Gangster Act was imposed upon applicant in the year 2023 whereas the property of applicant which was attached vide order dated 07.07.2023 passed by concerned authority under section 14 (1) of U.P. Gangster Act which was acquired by wife of applicant much earlier to the imposition of Gangster Act upon him i.e. in the year

5. Learned counsel for applicant further submitted that the concerned authority has wrongly and incorrectly attached the house of applicant on the wrong presumption that the said property has been acquired from the income earned by applicant by involving in anti social activities, whereas applicant is neither Gangster nor he has earned that property from involving in anti social activities.

6. Clarifying the position, it has been urged by the learned counsel for applicant that as a matter of fact, applicant was an auto driver and the property in question was not in the name of applicant rather the same was in the name of his wife, namely, Ritu Gupta and the said house was only in the possession of applicant on the basis of power of attorney executed by his father and moreso the said house was purchased by his father. It has also been submitted by the learned counsel for applicant that without considering all these relevant facts and documentary evidence, passed the impugned orders on wrong premise with oblique motive.

7. Learned counsel for applicant further submitted that the concerned authority has rejected his objection vide impugned order dated 14.06.2024 incorrectly by presuming that the property in question has been acquired by applicant from the income earned by indulging in anti social activities without going through documentary evidence filed on behalf of applicant and wrongly interpreting that applicant has not filed any document to prove that the property in question has not been acquired from the income

3. earned by indulging in anti social activities and as such, impugned order may be set aside.

8. Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer sought through the instant applicant and submitted that the order impugned has been passed after being fully satisfied that applicant has acquired the property in question by illegal means involving himself in anti social activities as defined under the Gangster Act, as such there is no illegality, infirmity or perversity in the impugned order. Learned AGA further submitted that applicant was also not able to show the source of income from which he had acquired the property in question.

9. I have heard the rival submissions extended by learned counsel for parties and perused all the material available on record.

10. It seems to be just and expedient to refer to the relevant provisions of the Gangster Act which are as under :- "2. Definitions- In this Act,- (a) "Code" means the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973; (b) "Gang" means a group of persons, who acting either singly or collectively, by violence, or threat or show of violence, or intimidation, or coercion or otherwise with the object of disturbing public order or of gaining any undue temporal, pecuniary, material or other advantage for himself or any other person, indulge in anti- social activities, namely- (i) offences punishable under Chapter XVI, or Chapter XVII, or Chapter XXII of the Indian Penal Code, or (ii) distilling or manufacturing or storing or transporting or importing or exporting or selling or distributing any liquor, or intoxicating or dangerous drugs, or other intoxicants or narcotics or cultivating any plant, in contravention of any of the provisions of the U.P. Excise Act, 1910 or the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 or any other law for the time being in force, (iii) occupying or taking possession of immovable property otherwise than in accordance with law, or setting-up false claims, for title or possession of immovable property whether in himself or any other person, or

4. (iv) preventing or attempting to prevent any public servant or any witness from discharging his lawful duties, or (v) offences punishable under the Suppression of Immoral Traffic in Women and Girls Act, 1956, or (vi) offences punishable under Section 3 of the Public Gambling Act, 1867, or (vii) preventing any person from offering bids in auction lawfully conducted, or tender, lawfully invited, by or on behalf of any Government department, local body or public or private undertaking, for any lease or rights or supply of goods or work to be done, or (viii) preventing or disturbing the smooth running by any person of his lawful business, profession, trade or employment or any other lawful activity connected therewith, or (ix) offences punishable under Section 171-E of the Indian Penal Code, or in preventing or obstructing any public election being lawfully held, by physically preventing the voter from exercising his electoral rights, or (x) inciting others to resort to violence to disturb communal harmony, or (xi) creating panic, alarm or terror in public, or (xii) terrorising or assaulting employees or owners or occupiers of public or private undertakings or factories and causing mischief in respect of their properties, or (xiii) inducing or attempting to induce any person to go to foreign countries on false representation that any employment, trade or profession shall be provided to him in such foreign country, or (xiv) kidnapping or abducting any person with intent to extort ransom, or (xv) diverting or otherwise preventing any aircraft or public transport vehicle from following its scheduled course; *(xvi) offences punishable under the Regulation of Money Lending Act, 1976; (xvii) illegally transporting and/or smuggling of cattle and indulging in acts in contravention of the provisions in the Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act, 1955 and the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960; (xviii) human trafficking for purposes of commercial exploitation, bonded labour, child labour, sexual exploitation, organ removing

5. and trafficking, beggary and the like activities; (xix) offences punishable under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1966; (xx) printing, transporting and circulating of fake Indian currency notes; (xxi) involving in production, sale and distribution of spurious drugs; (xxii) involving in manufacture, sale and transportation of arms and ammunition in contravention of Sections 5, 7 and 12 of the Arms Act, 1959; (xxiii) felling or killing for economic gains, smuggling of products in contravention of the Indian Forest Act, 1927 and The Wildlife Protection Act, 1972; (xxiv) offences punishable under the Entertainment and Betting Tax Act, 1979; (xvv) indulging in crimes that impact security of State, public order and even tempo of life,"

11. Further, on perusal of the offences which have been included in the definition of Gang includes offences under Chapter-XVII of Indian Penal Code which include the offence of theft under Section 378, offences under Section 403 and the related sections dealing with criminal misappropriation of property, Section 405 and allied sections deals with the crime of criminal breach of trust, dishonest misappropriation of property. Section 410 and related sections concern stolen property, Section 420 and related sections deal with offences of cheating which only involve deception, fraudulent or dishonest inducement to a person or his property. It is evident from the provisions included within the definition of gang do not require existence of force or violence. Similarly, offences under Section 3 of U.P. Public Gambling Act may not necessarily involve the use of force. Thus, the word ''otherwise' has been employed disjunctively in the definition of gang and cannot be read as "ejusdem generis", with other incidents of violence mentioned in the earlier part of this sub-section (Verneet Kumar vs. State of U.P. 2009 (1) ALL CrJ 377).

12. In the case in hand, the cases which were shown as criminal history against applicant, are related to the offences under Sections 379, 420, 392 IPC meaning thereby, applicant was involved in disturbing public order or of gaining any undue temporal, pecuniary, material or other advantage for himself. In sofar as property in question was owned in the year 2003 but as per the police report which shows that without having source of income, about Rs.90,00,000/- has been spent by applicant for furnishing as well as for modernization of the property in question meaning thereby, the said works has been done by the money earned by illegal means.

13. In view thereof, the Court finds that objection rejected by concerned authority after considering each and every material available before it and as such, there is no infirmity or illegality in the order impugned.

14. Accordingly, the instant application stands dismissed. Order Date :- 8.4.2025 #Vik/- (Saurabh Srivastava, J.) VIKRAM GUPTA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad