HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 20540 of 2025 Court No. - 47 HON'BLE SIDDHARTH, J. HON'BLE SANTOSH RAI, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner; learned A.G.A. for the State- respondents and perused the material on record. 2. This writ petition has been filed praying for quashing the impugned order/notice dated 21.7.2025 issued by the respondent no.2, Additional District Magistrate (Judicial), Hamirpur in Case No.D20250730000452/2025 (State Vs. Devendra Kumar), under Section 3 of U.P. Control of Goondas Act, Police Station Jariya, District Hamirpur. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the following cases have been registered against the petitioner:- 1. Case Crime No.104/2024, under Sections 504/506 IPC, Police Station Jariya, District Hamirpur. 2. Case Crime No.237/2024, under Sections 191(2)/191(3)/115(2)/ 352/ 351(2)/351(3)/126(2) BNS and Section 3/5 of Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, Police Station Jariya, District Hamirpur. 3. Beat Information Report No.38 dated 11.03.2025. 4. Inquiry Beat Report No.16 dated 12.03.2025. 5. Beat Information Report No.27 dated 30.03.2025. 6. Inquiry Beat Report No.16 dated 31.03.2025. 4. He has submitted that both cases have nothing to do with public peace, Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Govind Singh Rajpoot, Kali Shanker Tiwari, Santosh Kumar Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A. Devendra Kumar .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 3 Others .....Respondent(s) law and order and situation. It has been submitted that this Court in the case of Govardhan Vs. State of U.P., Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No.12619 of 2023 has held that by mere implication in one or two cases, accused does not becomes habitual offender and Goonda as per Section 2(b) of the Uttar Pradesh Control of Goondas Act, 1970. He has submitted that impugned proceedings are absolutely illegal in view of another judgment of this Court in the case of Ravi Vs. State of U.P. and others passed in Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No.3277 of 2024. 5. Learned AGA has opposed the submissions, but could not dispute the arguments raised by learned counsel for the petitioner. 6. In view of the above, impugned notice is hereby quashed. 7. The writ petition is, accordingly, allowed. September 22, 2025 Radhika CRLP No. 20540 of 2025 2 (Santosh Rai,J.) (Siddharth,J.) Digitally signed by :- RADHIKA VISHWAKARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad