HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 7914 of 2025 Court No. - 87 HON'BLE ABDUL SHAHID, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the revisionist. 2. The present criminal revision has been filed by the revisionist against the order dated 11.09.2025 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge/Fast Track Court (II), Amroha in Session Trial No.174 of 2025 arising out of Case Crime No. 272 of 2024, under section 3(1) of the U.P. Gangster and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986. 3. Learned counsel for the revisionist submits that the charge has been framed against the revisionist under Section 3(1) of the U.P. Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986. It is further submitted that Case Crime No. 67 of 2024, under Sections 302, 34, 203, 404, and 411 I.P.C., is already registered against the revisionist/accused. 4. Learned counsel for the revisionist has also filed a copy of the judgment and order dated 13.12.2023 passed by a Division Bench of this Court in Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 16258 of 2023, Sanni Mishra @ Sanjayan Kumar Mishra vs. State of U.P. and others, 2023: AHC: 235826-DB. It is submitted that no satisfaction has been recorded and that the District Magistrate has violated Rule 16(3) of the Gangsters Act. It is further submitted that while forwarding or approving the gang chart, the competent authorities must record their required satisfaction in clear words and not merely by signing a printed or typed format. 5. Per contra, learned A.G.A. opposes the submissions and submits that the charge has already been framed against the revisionist. It is contended that the present criminal revision has become infructuous as the discharge application filed by the revisionist was rejected on 11.09.2025. The learned trial court, after providing due opportunity of hearing to the revisionist/accused, passed a detailed order dated 11.09.2025 rejecting the discharge application. Thereafter, the charge was framed on the same date. The said order rejecting the discharge application has not been set aside by any competent Versus Counsel for Revisionist(s) : Kuldeep Tripathi, Shiv Shanker Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Anil Gangwar .....Revisionist(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) court of law. It is thus submitted that there is no illegality or irregularity in the impugned order. 6. There is neither any illegality or irregularity in the impugned order. 7. The criminal revision is liable to be dismissed and it is dismissed accordingly. February 24, 2026 K.K. Maurya CRLR No. 7914 of 2025 2 (Abdul Shahid,J.) Digitally signed by :- KAMLESH KUMAR MAURYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad