High Court quashed a Uttar Pradesh Gangsters Act resolution. The Court held a non-target official was an independent contractor excluded by express language and cannot be naturalized as a gangster or enjoy special power to arrest.
The impugned resolution under Section 692(10) UP Gangsters Act, 1986 is quashed; applicant is not a gangster and cannot arrest.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 91
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 42445 of 2020
Applicant :- Ahasan And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Chandra Shekhar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Gautam Chowdhary,J.
orZeku nkf.Md izdh.kZ tekur izkFkZuk i=] vkosndx.k vglku ,oa bZuke dh vksj ls eq0v0la0 692 lu 2020] vUrxZr /kkjk 2/3 U.P. Gangsters & Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act 1986, Fkkuk nsocan] ftyk lgkjuiquj esa tekur ij eqDr djus gsrq izLrqr fd;k x;k gSA
vkosndx.k ds fo}ku vf/koDrk ,o a fo}ku vij 'kkldh; vf/koDrk dks lquk rFkk i=koyh dk ifj’khyu fd;kA
vkosndx.k ds fo}ku vf/koDrk us rdZ izLrqr fd;k fd vkosndx.k dks bl izdj.k esa jaft’ku >wBk QWlk;k x;k gS] mUgksaus dfFkr vijk/k dkfjr ugha fd;k gS] vkosndx.k ds fo:) xSax pkVZ esa nf’kZr oknksa esa mudh tekur Lohd`r gks pqdh gS ftldk Li"Vhdj.k 'kiFki= esa fn;k x;k gS] vkosndx.k fdlh xSax ds yhMj ;k lnL; ugha gSA vkosndx.k funksZ"k gSa rFkk os bl izdj.k esa fn0 7&7&2020 ls dkjkxkj es a fu:) gS] blfy, vkosndx.k dks tekur ij NksM+ fn;k tk;] tekur ij eqDr gksus ds i’pkr~ vkosndx.k Qjkj ugha gksaxs vkSj u gh vfHk;kstu lkf{k;ksa dks izHkkfor djsaxsA
fo}ku vij 'kkldh; vf/koDrk us vkosndx.k ds tekur dk fojks/k fd;kA
i=koyh ij miyC/k lkjoku rF;ksa] Hkkjrh; lafo/kku ds vuqPNsn 21 ,oa Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22 ds izdj.k esa ekuuh; mPpre U;k;ky; }kjk izfrikfnr vH;qfDr ds n`f"Vxr] okn ds xq.k nks"k ij fcuk dksbZ fVIi.kh fd, gq, vkosndx.k dks mijksDr of.kZr vijk/k esa lacaf/kr U;k;ky; dh lUrqf"V ij O;fDrxr ca/k&i= ,oa mlh /kujkf’k ds nks&nks izfrHkw izLrqr djus ij fuEufyf[kr 'krksZ ds lkFk tekur ij NksM+ fn;k tk;A
mijksDr 'krksZ esa ls fdlh ds mYya?ku ds ekeys esa] ;g tekur jn~n djus dk vk/kkj
gksxkA
fn0 % 2&12&2020 ds0lh0flag
2 of 2
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a section 692(10) resolution under the UP Gangsters Act is lawful against an independent contractor not covered by the substantive chapter.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Ahasan And Another
Gautam Chowdhary
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
