Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 97426 (ALL)

BIJENDRA @ BANTY AND ANOTHER v. STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

NA528/35922/2025 · 2025-09-17

Saurabh Srivastava

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 35922 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 charge-sheet dated 11.10.2012 along with cognizance/summoning order dated 30.10.2012 and the entire proceedings of Special Case No.72 of 2012 (State Vs. Vivek @ Vikki and others), arising out of Case Crime No.178 of 2011, under Sections 2/3 of The U.P. Gangster & Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, Police Station- Fugana, District- Muzaffar Nagar, pending in the court of learned Special Judge (Gangster Act)/Additional Session Judge, Court No.5, Muzaffar Nagar. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that the proceeding under the Gangster Act has been initiated against applicant no.1 on the basis of solitary case bearing Case Crime No.21 of 2011, under sections 147, 148, 302/149, 307/149, 341, 120B IPC as well as against applicant no.2 on the basis of two cases, i.e, Case Crime No.21 of 2011 and Case Crime No.22 of 2011 in pursuance to section 25 of Arms Act. In the said cases, both the applicants were acquitted by learned court of Special Judge SC/ST (PoA) Act, 1989, Muzaffarnagar vide order dated 18.12.2021, the said order is annexed as Annexure No.4 to the affidavit. Learned counsel for applicants further submitted that once in the base cases applicants have been exonerated/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 Court in Farhana vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and others [2024 0 INSC 118] and stated that once Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Sushil Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Bijendra @ Banty And Another .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) the base case is already quashed or the applicants have already been acquitted in the same, 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 application and rebutted the stand taken up by learned counsel for applicants, but at the same he did not dispute the order dated 18.12.2021 passed by learned court concerned. 5. After having the rival contentions raised by learned counsel for parties, it is crystal clear that in the base cases depicted in the gang chart, applicant has already been acquitted 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 the applicants have already been acquitted in the base cases, charge-sheet dated 11.10.2012 along with cognizance/summoning order dated 30.10.2012 and the entire proceedings of Special Case No.72 of 2012 (State Vs. Vivek @ Vikki and others), arising out of Case Crime No.178 of 2011, under Sections 2/3 of The U.P. Gangster & Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, Police Station- Fugana, District- Muzaffar Nagar, pending in the court of learned Special Judge (Gangster Act)/Additional Session Judge, Court No.5, Muzaffar Nagar, are hereby quashed only in pursuance of applicants herein. 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. September 18, 2025 Saif NA528 No. 35922 of 2025 2 (Saurabh Srivastava,J.) Digitally signed by :- SHAIKH SAIF ABDIN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad