Allowed

Ram Pukar Chauhan v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC1 Aug 2024A482/21844/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge quashed summoning order and proceedings under U.P. Gangsters Act, finding FIR registration was mechanically approved violating rules, despite applicant's mental illness and lack of justification by District Magistrate and police officials.

What did the court decide?

Charge sheet dated 27.05.2020 and entire proceedings of G.S.T. No.536 of 2020 regarding applicant are quashed.

Ram Pukar Chauhan vs State of U.P. and Another — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:172435

¶2

Court No. - 78

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 21844 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Ram Pukar Chauhan Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Rituraj Singh,Vishal Jaiswal Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Vinod Diwakar,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶7

Shri Gyan Prakash Tripathi, the then District Magistrate, Shri Surendra Bahadur Singh, the then S.P., Mau, and Shri Shailendra Srivastava, the then Additional S.P. (Nodal Officer), appeared in Court today through videoconferencing. Inspector Shri Akhilesh Kumar and S.I. Shri Rupesh Kumar Singh, the Investigating Officers of the case, also appeared in person.

¶8

The instant application has been preferred with the prayer to quash the summoning order dated 25.09.2020 and the entire proceedings of G.S.T. No.536 of 2020, titled State v. Ram Narayan and others, arising out of case crime no. 170 of 2019, under Section 3(1) U.P. Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act,1986, P.S. Madhuvan, District Mau, pending in the Court of Special Judge (U.P. Gangster Act)/Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge (POCSO Act), Court No. 3.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant states that the applicant had a mental illness and was not in a position to indulge in any activity covered under the provisions of the Gangsters Act. The sanction of the Gangsters Act has been given in violation of the rules and the

¶10

provisions of the Act. Based on a solitary case, the provisions of the Gangsters Act have been invoked against the applicant. The charge sheet has been filed without proper investigation. There is material on record that suggests that at the time of investigation, the applicant had a mental illness and was undergoing treatment at B.H.U. Varanasi. Therefore, the applicant cannot be said to have indulged in any sort of activities as stated in the charge sheet. The District Magistrate also did not apply his independent mind at the time of approval of the gang chart to quantify the revenue loss, if any, caused to the government and approved the gang chart mechanically.

¶11

Per contra, learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer and submits that the applicant is a gangster involved in a case under the Excise Act. There are serious allegations against the applicant, and the Police have investigated fairly.

¶12

On the Court's query from the then-District Magistrate and then S.P. Mau (since retired) appeared through video -conferencing that what was the material before them, which persuaded them to invoke provisions of the Gangsters Act, both the officers could not justify the reason for approving registration of a case under the provisions of Gangsters Act. The trial court record suggests that the Investigating Officer recorded the finding that the applicant was bedridden and taking treatment from the B.H.U. Varanasi at the time of approval.

¶13

Based on the foregoing discussion and after examining the material available on record and hearing the then-District Magistrate and then-Superintendent of Police, then Additional S.P. (Nodal Officer) Mau, this Court concludes that the approval for lodging the F.I.R. under the Gansters Act had been given

¶14

mechanically in contraventions of the rules framed thereunder and notifications-time to time- issued by the State Government in this regard. Therefore, it is a fit case to quash the charge sheet and the entire proceedings of the instant case qua applicant.

¶15

In view of aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, the charge sheet dated 27.05.2020, as well as the entire proceedings of G.S.T. No.536 of 2020, titled State v. Ram Narayan and others, arising out of case crime no. 170 of 2019, under Section 3(1) U.P. Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act,1986, P.S. Madhuvan, District Mau, pending in the Court of Special Judge (U.P. Gangster Act)/Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge (POCSO Act), Court No. 3, are hereby quashed.

¶16

Accordingly, the application is allowed .

¶17

Personal appearance of Shri Gyan Prakash Tripathi, the then District Magistrate, Shri Surendra Bahadur Singh, the then S.P., Mau, and Shri Shailendra Srivastava, the then Additional S.P. (Nodal Officer), who have appeared in Court today through videoconferencing and Inspector Shri Akhilesh Kumar and S.I. Shri Rupesh Kumar Singh, the Investigating Officers of the case, who have appeared in person in Court, are exempted.

¶18

Order Date :- 5.11.2024 A. Tripathi

¶19

Justice Vinod Diwakar

¶20

Digitally signed by :- AKHILESH TRIPATHI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Ram Pukar Chauhan v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ram Pukar Chauhan v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Ashok Sharma vs State of U.P. and Another

Jitendra Singh Chauhan @ Joni Thakur vs State of U.P. and Another

Azim Ali vs State of Up Others

Sunil Dutt vs State of Up and Another

Pooran Singh vs State of Up and Another

Abul Husain vs State of U.P. and Another