Writ petition against externment and related orders under the U.P. Control of Goondas Act, 1970. The High Court set aside the appellate order for being non-speaking, as it failed to consider the grounds in the appeal, and remanded for fresh decision expeditiously.
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.
Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:86121
Court No. - 12
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 9969 of 2024
Petitioner :- Vishnu Yadav
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Sanjay Shanker Pandey,Rina Pandey Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned AGA for the State of U.P. and perused the record.
By means of this petition, the petitioner has sought the following main reliefs:-
"(i) This Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to issue a writ of Certiorari to quash the externment order dated 25.09.2024 passed in Case No.111(27)/2024, in re; State of U.P. Vs. Vishnu Yadav, District-Lucknow, by Joint Police Commissioner (Law & order) under section 3 of the Uttar Pradesh Control of Goondas Act 1970 contained in Annexure No. 1 to the writ petition.
(ii) This Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to issue a writ of Certiorari to quash the order dated 13.11.2024 passed in in Misc case no 01/2024 by Joint Police Commissioner (Law & order) under section 9 of the Uttar Pradesh Control of Goondas Act 1970, contained in Annexure No. 2 to the writ petition.
(iii) This Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to issue a writ of Certiorari to quash the appellate order dated 21.11.2024, dismissing the petitioner's appeal case 4737/2024 no by Divisional Commissioner, Lucknow under section 6 of the Uttar Pradesh Control of Goondas Act 1970 contained in Annexure No. 3 to the writ petition.
(iv) To declare that the invocation of the Uttar Pradesh control of goondas act against the petitioner, based on insufficient evidence, is arbitrary, illegal and unconstitutional."
Vide order dated 21.11.2024, the Commissioner, Lucknow Division, Lucknow (in short "appellate authority") rejected the Appeal No. 4737/2024 (Vishnu Yadav vs. State of U.P.) filed under Section 6 of U.P. Control of Goondas Act, 1970 (in short "Act of 1970"). The relevant portion of the order dated 21.11.2024 is extracted hereunder:-
" अवरनययययलयदयरयपयररतआददशकदअवललकनसदसपषहहककममकदमयअपरयधससखयय-मम0 अ 0 सस0 280/2023 धयरय 323, 504, 506 आई 0 पप0 सप0, ममकदमयअपरयधससखयय 183/2023 धयरय 147, 323, 504, 427,506 आई 0 पप0 सप0, ममकदमयअपरयधससखयय 288/2023 धयरय 323, 452, 504, 506 आई 0 पप0 सप0,ममकदमयअपरयधससखयय 879/2020 धयरय 147, 323, 504, 506, 427 आई 0 पप0 सप0, ममकदमयअपरयधससखयय-474/2015 धयरय-452, 323, 506 आई 0 पप0 सप0, बपटससचनयरपटससखयय-40 कदनयसक 17-3-2024, कनरलधयतमककययरवयहपधयरय107/116 द 0 प 0 सस0 कदनयसक 19-07-2023, कनरलधयतमककययरवयहपधयरय-151, 107, 116 द 0 प 0 सस0 कदनयसक 03-11-2023 थयनयगलमतपनगरकवसतयर, लखनऊपसजपककतहहयदहह।
कककमनलररटकपटपशनससखयय 1359 आफ 2001 जजतदनदउफरजपतसबनयमकडससटसकटमहजजसटसदटव अनयमममय0 उचचनययययलयइलयहयबयददयरयपयररतकनररयकदनयसक 27-3-2001 ममयहदषयनत पकतपयकदतककययगययहहककगमणडयकनयसतरअजधकनयमकककययरवयहपहदतमआपरयजधकइकतहयसकय हलनयआवशयकनहहहहकययककसमयजममककतपयवयककऐसदहलतदहह, जजनकदभयवआतसककद कयररजनतयकयकलईभपवयककउनकदकवरदअकभयलगपसजपककतकरयनदएवसनययययलयममसयकय ददनदकयसयहसनहहकरपयतयहह।नययययलयदयरययहअवधयररतककययगययहहककउकपवकजतकद वयककययपरअसकमशलगयनदहदतमहपउ 0 प 0 गमणडयकनयसतरअजधकनयमकयअजधकनयमनककययगयय हह।
अपपलकतयरकलइसअपपलपयनययययलयदयरयसमनवयईकयसममकचतअवसरपदयनककययगययककनतम अपपलकतयरककओरसदऐसयकलईठलसआधयरनहहबतयययजयसकयजजससदअवरनययययलयदयरय पयररतआददशममककसपहसतकदपककआवशयकतयहल।
ससयमकपमजलसआयमक (कयनसनएवसवयवसथय) लखनऊदयरयपयररतआददशममवकररतपररससथकतययसद सपषहलरहयहहककअपपलकतयरकयएकलमबयआपरयजधकइकतहयसहह।अपपलकतयरभय0 द 0 कव0 कद अधययय 16, 17 एवस 22 कदअधपनदणडनपयअपरयधकयररतकरनदकयअभयसतहह।ससयमकपमजलस आयमक (कयनसनएवसवयवसथय) लखनऊनदअपपलकतयरकलसमनवयईकयसममकचतअवसरददतदहहयद गमरदलषपरआददशपयररतककययहहजजसममकलईकवजधकतमकटनहहहह।अपपलआधयरहपनएवसबलहपन हलनदकदकयररकनरसतहलनदयलगयहह।
6- उपरलककववदचनयकदपकयशममअपपलआधयरहपनएवसबलहपनहलनदकदकयररकनरसतककजयतप हह।आददशककएकपकतअवरनययययलयकलभदजपजययद।बयदआवशयककययरवयहपइसनययययलय ककपतयवलपदयजखलदफतरहल।"
Upon due consideration of the aforesaid and also the grounds taken in the memo of appeal, copy of which placed before this Court is taken on record, this Court is of the view that the order dated 21.11.2024 is liable to be interfered with, as the same has not been passed after considering the grounds taken in the appeal and being so, the impugned order is not a reasoned and speaking order. It is accordingly set-aside . The matter is remanded back to the authority concerned for decision afresh as per law including the law settled in the judgment(s) passed by this Court in the case of Imran Alias Abdul Quddus Khan vs. State of U.P. and others; 2000 Cri. L.J. 1328, Lalani Pandey @ Vijay Shaker Pandey vs. State of U.P. and others; [2011(1) JIC 503 (All)(LB)] and Umar @ Mohd Umair vs. State of U.P. and another; [2024(3) JIC 316 (All)] , expeditiously.
The instant petition is allowed in above terms.
Order Date :- 20.12.2024 Arun/-
Digitally signed by :- ARUN KUMAR GANGWAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the appellate authority's order under Section 6 of the Goondas Act was valid when passed without considering the grounds raised in the appeal.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Imran Alias Abdul Quddus Khan vs. State of U.P. and othersRelied on¶19
2000 Cri. L.J. 1328 · Who else cites this
Lalani Pandey @ Vijay Shaker Pandey vs. State of U.P. and othersRelied on¶19
[2011(1) JIC 503 (All)(LB)]
Umar @ Mohd Umair vs. State of U.P. and anotherRelied on¶19
[2024(3) JIC 316 (All)]
3 provisions across 2 enactments
Vishnu Yadav
State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.
Saurabh Lavania
As recorded by the court registry
2 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
