Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:137759 Court No. - 77 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 14479 of 2025 Applicant :- Rinku @ Harish Opposite Party :- 1.State Of U.P., 2. Subodh Kumar Singh In-Charge Inspector Counsel for Applicant :- Brijesh Kumar Prajapati,Mahesh Kumar,Maheshwari Prasad Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Saurabh Srivastava,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State and perused the record. 2. The present application has been preferred for seeking quashing of order of framing charge dated 18.03.2019 and entire proceedings of G.S.T. No.54 of 2018 (State Vs. Govinda and others), arising out of Case Crime No.1181 of 2017, under Section 2/3 of U.P. Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, P.S. Vrindavan, District Mathura, pending the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-Vth, Mathura. 3. Learned counsel for applicant has submitted that applicant has been implicated in the present case only on the basis of one base case bearing Case Crime No.1043 of 2017, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 307, 506, 34 IPC wherein has been convicted and thereafter released on bail by this Court vide order dated 09.05.2024 passed in Criminal Appeal No.7986 of 2022 preferred at the behest of applicant. Learned counsel for applicant has further submitted that gang chart has been prepared by the authorities concerned in gross violation of Rules 5(3)(a), 16 and 17 of U.P. Gangster Rules, 2021 and as such, entire proceedings of the present case may be set aside. 4. Per contra, learned AGA vehemently opposed the prayer sought through the instant application and rebutted the stands taken up by learned counsel for applicant by way of submitting that on the basis of one case, a person can be implicated under the Gangster Act. Learned AGA has further contended that impugned order has been challenged after delay of about 6 years through which charges have already been framed and there is no explanation for approaching this Court after the delay of six years. In sofar as violation of Rules 5(3)(a), 16 and 17 of U.P. Gangster Rules, 2021 are concerned, learned AGA has contended that in the present case gang chart was prepared in the year 2017 therefore, Gangster Rules, 2021 will not be applicable in case of applicant. 5. After hearing the rival contentions raised by learned counsel for parties and on perusal of record, it is evident that the gang chart in the present case, was prepared in the year 2017, therefore, Gangster Rules, 2021 will not be applicable and as such, argument of learned counsel for applicant in pursuance of violation of Rules 5(3)(a), 16 and 17 of U.P. Gangster Rules, 2021, is not sustainable. In sofar as the argument of learned counsel for applicant that on the basis of solitary case, applicant has not been implicated in the Gangster Act is concerned, the said argument is not sustainable since Hon'ble the Apex Court in the case of Shraddha Gupta v. State of U.P., 2022 SCC OnLine SC 514 already held that provision of Gangster Act can be invoked against an accused on the base of solitary case. 6. It is also apparent from the record that impugned order has been challenged after delay of about 6 years through which charges have already been framed and there is no explanation for approaching this Court for challenging the same after such a long delay. In the cases of Cicily Kallarackal v. Vehicle Factory [2012 (8) SCC 524], State of Orissa v. Mamata Mohanty [2011 (3) SCC 436] and K.R. Mudgal v. R.P. Singh [1986 (4) SCC 531], Hon'ble the Apex Court has already been held that the application should be rejected on the ground of inordinate delay. 10. In view of legal position mentioned above, this Court holds that application filed under Section 528 BNSS for quashing the criminal proceeding, is not maintainable after considerably long period in absence of any explanation for delay, specifically when charges were framed against applicant in his presence long back, except in exceptional cases which may persuade the Court to interfere in the interest of justice. 110. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the present application being devoid of merit, is, accordingly, dismissed. Order Date :- 12.8.2025 Vivek Kr. NA528 No. 14479 of 2025 2 Digitally signed by :- VIVEK KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad