Rajesh Kumar vs State of U.P. and Another

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:126298

Court No. - 77

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 34534 of 2024

Applicant :- Rajesh Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Akhilesh Kumar Mishra,Siddharth Saran Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Saurabh Srivastava,J.

¶6

Heard Shri Siddharth Saran along with Shri Akhilesh Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant and Shri Roopak Chaubey, learned AGA-I for the State- opposite parties.

¶7

It is the case of the applicant that on the basis of only one case case registered against the applicant in Case Crime No. 498 of 2009 in pursuance of Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 332, 353, 216 of IPC, P.S.- Dadri, District- Gautam Buddha Nagar wherein applicant was not named in the FIR but later on implicated on the basis of the supplementary charge-sheet submitted by the concerned Investigating Officer, that too, without assigning any specific role, wherein applicant has been extended bail vide order dated 25.07.2012 passed by Additional District & Sessions Judge, Court No. 5, Gautam Buddha Nagar, wherein the ground for consideration is also mentioned that even the applicant has been implicated in pursuance of Section 307 of IPC but there is hardly any injury sustained by any police personnel.

¶8

It is further submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is conducting and running a Transport Company which is involved in a clean chit business for loading and unloading certain heavy articles and he is nowhere concern about gang and as such, he has been falsely implicated and connected to a gang which has been led by gang-leader Randeep Bhati. Learned counsel for the

¶9

applicant sought the attention of the Court over the supplementary charge-sheet submitted under the gangsters proceedings, wherein the applicant has been shown as implicated on the basis of two case crime numbers but as per the learned counsel for the applicant, the applicant has been implicated only in Case Crime No. 498 of 2009 but too at the stage of submission of supplementary charge-sheet, which is a no injury case and registered at the behest of police officials.

¶10

4. Per contra , Shri Roopak Chaubey, learned AGA-I appearing on behalf of the State while defending the proceeding initiated against the applicant through which the applicant has been implicated in Case Crime No. 1405 of 2019 in pursuance of Sections 2(b)(i), 2(b)(iii), 2(b)(iv), 2(b)(xi), 2(b)(xii), 3(1), 2(b)(viii) of Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 registered at P.S.- Dadri, District- Gautam Buddha Nagar submitted that gang of Randeep Bhati is having a very famous bad history since 2018 itself. When the Noida Development Authority was putting it's potentialities to grow up the infrastructure and for inviting foreign investments inside the State of U.P. especially at NOIDA, the gang mentioned above, involved in every manner intended to capture the entire activities by having there own share in the same through illegal methods and applicant is one of them who was operating Transport Company having several trucks who are also involved in the same.

¶11

After hearing the rival submissions extended by learned counsel for the parties, the precise query made before learned AGA-I in respect of having knowledge of one more case against the applicant which is mentioned in the charge sheet at the time of implicating the applicant in the gangsters proceedings,

¶12

unfortunately, after seeking proper time separately from the court proceedings and to study the entire material which is available with the learned AGA-I appearing for the State, he could not reply the same since in the report which is part of the instructions provided by District Crime Records Bureau (DCRB), there is only one case available against the applicant and as such, the basis for implicating the applicant under the gangsters proceeding in Case Crime No. 1405 of 2019 is not on the ground of two cases but, in fact, only on the ground of having one case, wherein applicant has already been granted bail and no specific role has been assigned at the time of submitting of supplementary charge-sheet by the concerned Investigating Officer in Case Crime No. 498 of 2009. The role of the applicant has to be dealt with the argument raised by learned AGA-I and, as such, involvement of being Transport Company owner which is having some trucks, plied for loading and unloading heavy articles, it might be possible that once the gang-leader is involved in each and every business as mentioned by learned AGA-I, the same truck might be used in same activities but at the same time, the applicant cannot be considered as a gangster rather victim of the same gang-leader, if the trucks were involved in the nefarious activities carried out by the said gang, there is hardly any possibility of paying a single rupee by the gang leader in shape of transportation charges.

¶13

No other specific role has been assigned while preferring FIR which has been registered at Case Crime No. 1405 of 2019 and the entire proceedings of gangster act has been initiated against the applicant without preparation of any specific gang-chart.

¶14

Certain provisions of Gangsters Rules, 2021 were relied upon by learned counsel for the applicant but the matter which has been

¶15

initiated against the applicant pertains to 2019 and as such the same was highly opposed by learned AGA-I but the at the same time, the bias intention of the prosecution is slightly missing while conducting proceeding under the gangsters act against the applicant. Although, the rules were not available at that time but the simple procedure for implicating the person on the basis of the cases which ought to be submitted at the time of charge-sheet has been wrongly mentioned by concerned Investigating Officer, once only one case crime number is available against the applicant apart from the Case Crime No. 1405 of 2019, under which circumstances, two cases have been shown as a criminal history and the same has been made basis for implication of the applicant under the gangsters proceedings, is also tending to be declared proceeding as malicious one as submitted by learned counsel for the applicant.

¶16

In view of the aforementioned facts and circumstances, the entire investigation, if initiated on the wrong facts, may lead certainly to the wrong prosecution since the criminal procedure is based upon the theory of computer science which is broadly studied at very preliminary level i.e. 'G.I.G.O.' which means that if you input the garbage into computer, the garbage will come out. In the same manner, if the inquiry has been conducted on some other facts, the entire trial will deviate from achieving the real facts which may deviate the final outcome of the same.

¶17

Under Section 482 of CrPC exercising the inherent powers conferred with the High Court which is the imminent duty and responsibility lies over the shoulders of the High Court which has been mandated by the procedure conferred by legislation not to permit the subordinate courts to proceed on the basis of illegality

¶18

involved in the matter. In the instant matter, illegality is quite apparent on the basis of misfactual consideration as mentioned in the charge-sheet itself and as such, entire proceedings arsing out of Case Crime No. 1405 of 2019 in pursuance of Sections 2(b)(i), 2(b)(iii), 2(b)(iv), 2(b)(xi), 2(b)(xii), 3(1), 2(b)(viii) of Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 registered at P.S.- Dadri, District- Gautam Buddha Nagar are hereby set aside . Application stands allowed .

¶19

Order Date :- 29.7.2025 Rama Kant

¶20

Digitally signed by :- RAMA KANT High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Rajesh Kumar v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajesh Kumar v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Ram Bharos Yadav vs State of U.P. and Another

Nawab Singh vs State of U.P.

Brijmohan Vishwakarma Alias Jhinak vs State of U.P. and Another

Dilshad vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Asfaq Ahmad vs State of U.P. and Another

Amarjeet and Another vs State of U.P. and Another