HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 36375 of 2025 Court No. - 77 HON'BLE SAURABH SRIVASTAVA, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for applicants and learned A.G.A. on behalf of the State. 2. This application has been preferred for quashing the summoning order dated 21.12.2023 passed by learned Additional District and Sessions Judge/Gangster Act, Room no. 3, Rampur and charge sheet dated 21.4.2023 submitted by opposite party no. 4 as well as entire proceedings in S.S.T. no. 104 of 2023 (State vs. Ujjaldedar Singh @ Sabi and others) arising out of Case Crime no. 306 of 2022 under Section 3(1) of U.P.Gangster and Anti- Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, PS- Bilaspur, District Rampur. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that the proceeding under the Gangster Act has been initiated against applicants on the basis of solitary case bearing Case Crime No.159 of 2021, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 171-H, 188, 307, 323, 504 IPC and 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act, Police Station Bilaspur, District Rampur wherein proceedings of said case have already been quashed by this Court on the basis of compromise vide order dated 23.9.2024 passed in Criminal Appeal no. 10001 of 2023 (Ujjaldedar Singh @ Sabi and 7 others vs. State of U.P. and another), copy of which is annexed as Annexure no. 6 to the affidavit. Learned counsel for applicant further submitted that once in the base case, proceeding has already been quashed/applicants have been acquitted, the instant proceeding under the Gangster Act cannot be drawn. In support of his submission, learned counsel for applicants has placed reliance on the judgement passed by the Apex Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Madhur Prasad, Malay Prasad, Saloni Mathur, Tanya Makker Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Karamjeet Singh @ Karandeep Singh And Another .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. And 3 Others .....Opposite Party(s) Court in Farhana vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and others [2024 0 INSC 118] and stated that once the base case is already quashed, the impugned proceeding cannot go on under the Gangster Act and the entire process is unsustainable and liable to be set aside. 4. Per contra, learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the prayer sought through the instant applicant but could not dispute the aforesaid facts. 5. After having the rival contentions raised by learned counsel for parties, it is crystal clear that base case depicted in the gang chart has already been quashed and once the proceedings of the base cases depicted in the gang chart are quashed or the accused has been acquitted, the proceedings under the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act are liable to be quashed [Ref: Farhana (supra) rendered by Hon'ble the Apex Court, Salim @ Piyaoo Vs. State of U.P. rendered by this Court in Criminal Revision No. 2541 of 2011, Jai Prakash and others Vs. State of U.P. rendered by this Court in Criminal Revision No. 3309 of 2008 and Sartaj Vs. State of U.P. rendered by this Court in Appl. U/S 482 No.11645 of 2007]. 6. In wake of the preceding discussion, since in base case proceedings have been quashed, entire proceedings of S.S.T. no. 104 of 2023 (State vs. Ujjaldedar Singh @ Sabi and others) arising out of Case Crime no. 306 of 2022 under Section 3(1) of U.P.Gangster and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, PS- Bilaspur, District Rampur are hereby quashed only in pursuance of applicants namely Karamjeet Singh @ Karandeep Singh and Manjeet Singh @ Manpreet Singh. 7. The present application is, accordingly, allowed. 8. However, it is made clear that this order shall not preclude the authorities concerned to initiate fresh proceedings in pursuance of any other case against the applicants. October 6, 2025 Shaswat NA528 No. 36375 of 2025 2 (Saurabh Srivastava,J.) Digitally signed by :- SHASWAT SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad