2025:UHC:1198 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS WPCRL No. 103 of 2025 Hon’ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J. 1. Mr. B.S. Bhandari, learned counsel for the petitioners. 2. Mr. V.S. Pal, learned Assistant Government Advocate for the State. 3. Mr. Mukesh Rawat, learned counsel for the complainant. 4. By the instant writ petition, petitioners are praying for quashing of the FIR dated 02.01.2025 bearing FIR No. 0004 of 2025, Police Station Mukhani, District – Nainital wherein petitioners have been implicated for the offences punishable under Section 2/ 3 of the U.P. Gangsters and Antisocial Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners have been implicated in the present FIR merely on the ground that they are named in other criminal cases. There are seven criminal cases registered against petitioner no. 1 Pankaj Verma, which are as follows: “i. FIR No. 72 of 2023 under Section 420, 342, 323, 504, 506 IPC. ii. FIR No. 93 of 2023 under Section 420, 504, 506 IPC iii. FIR No. 132 of 2023 under Section 342, 506 IPC. iv. FIR No. 203 of 2023 under Section 420, 506 IPC. v. FIR No. 211 of 2023 under Section 506 IPC. vi. FIR No. 212 of 2023 under Section 506 IPC. vii. FIR No. 245 of 2023 under Section 420, 406, 506 IPC.” 6. So far as petitioner no. 2 - Tarun Rajput is concerned, there are three criminal cases registered against him. 7. Admittedly, petitioners have long criminal 2025:UHC:1198 history. It appears that they are habitual offenders. 8. Learned State Counsel informs to this Court that petitioner no. 1 is a gang leader. 9. Mr. Mukesh Rawat, learned counsel for the complainant submits that petitioners are involved in the business of real estate and they have taken a huge amount from him and when he asked for refund, petitioners are giving threatening him. 10. Admittedly, petitioner no. 1 has seven criminal cases and petitioner no. 2 has three criminal cases and they have long criminal history. 11. It appears that petitioners are repeatedly indulged in criminal activities, therefore, I do not find any merit in this petition. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. (Rakesh Thapliyal, J.) 19.02.2025 SKS 2025:UHC:1198