Disposed

Ramanand Jaiswal v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC18 Feb 2025CRLP/2457/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner sought quashing of an FIR and non-arrest direction under the U.P. Gangster Act. The High Court granted a six-week extension for respondents to file a counter affidavit, restrained arrest pending the police report, and listed the matter for further consideration. Cited precedents were only referenced.

What did the court decide?

Respondents given six weeks to file counter affidavit; petitioner allowed two weeks for rejoinder; arrest restrained pending police report or further order.

Ramanand Jaiswal vs State of U.P. and 2 Others — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

Court No. - 42

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 2457 of 2025

¶3

Petitioner :- Ramanand Jaiswal Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Bhriguram Ji,Nilesh Kumar Dubey,Shashi Shekhar Maurya

¶4

Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J. Hon'ble Prashant Kumar,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Nilesh Kumar Dubey, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.G.A. for the respondents.

¶7

The relief sought in this petition is for quashing of the F.I.R. dated 17-01-2025 registered as Case Crime No. 0036 of 2025, under Sections 2 (b) (i), 2(b) (ii), 2(b)(xi) and 3 (1) U.P. Gangster and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, P.S. Jhangaha, Distt. Gorakhpur in respect of the petitioner and for a direction to respondents not to arrest the petitioner pursuant to impugned FIR.

¶8

This much is averred that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case and no offence under the aforesaid Sections is made out against him. He has good reputation in the society. The petitioner is not a member or leader or organiser of a group which indulges in the kind of activities set out under the various sub-clauses of clause (b) of Section 2, by use of violence or threat or show of violence or intimidation etc. Ref : Ashok Kumar Dixit vs. State of U.P. 1987 (34) ACC 164 . It is further averred that the use of word "activities"in a criminal proceeding cannot indicate that a single act of anti-social activity can turn a person into a gangster. There have to be at-least two acts and the commission of those act by the accused has to be established beyond reasonable doubt according rules of evidence as applicable to criminal trial. Ref: State of U.P. vs. Phool Mia 1998 (1) JIC 792 (All) . It is averred that as per gang chart, there is only one criminal case registered against the petitioner as Case Crime No.546 of 2023 under Sections 258, 259, 260, 262, 420, 467, 468, 471, 474 IPC and Section 60/72 Excise Act, P.S. Jhangaha, Distt. Gorakhpur in which he has already been granted bail by the trial court on 04-12-2023 and as such the impugned FIR is liable to be quashed.

¶9

Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the writ petition and submitted that from bare perusal of the FIR

¶10

cognizable offence is made out against the petitioner and the authorities had rightly invoked the provisions of Gangster Act. It is also submitted that even on the basis of solitary case proceeding under the Gangster Act can be imposed. Reliance in this regard has been placed on the judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Shraddha Gupta vs The State Of Uttar Pradesh decided on 26 April, 2022 in Criminal Appeal No. 569-570 of 2022 .

¶11

5. The matter requires consideration.

¶12

Learned A.G.A. has accepted notice on behalf of the Staterespondents, who prays for and is allowed six weeks' time to file counter affidavit. Petitioner shall have two weeks thereafter to file rejoinder affidavit.

¶13

7. List thereafter.

¶14

Till the next date of listing, or till submission of the police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. (now Section 193(3) of Bhartiya Nagrika Suraksha Sanhita, 2023), whichever is earlier, the respondents are restrained to arrest the petitioners pursuant to the impugned F.I.R. subject to co-operation in the ongoing investigation.

¶15

Order Date :- 18.2.2025

¶16

pks

¶17

Digitally signed by :- PANKAJ KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Ramanand Jaiswal v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramanand Jaiswal v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Amresh Ahirwar vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Pawan Mishra vs Smt. Indu Mishra

Dr Aradhana Pathak vs Central Bureau of Investigation

Vikas vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Dayaram and 3 Others vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Vipin Sharma vs State of U.P. and 3 Others