Dismissed¶20

Shravan Kumar v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC7 May 2026CRLP/8218/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Gangsters Act prosecution on solitary/single case; Rule 5(3)(a) compliance and recorded reasons; FIR quashing writ dismissed; U.P. Gangster and Anti Social Activities Act, 1986, Sections 2(b)(i) and 3(1); Case Crime No. 61 of 2026; PS Jahanaganj, District Azamgarh; interim order vacated; Allahabad High Court; 2026.

What did the court decide?

The objections raised by the learned AGA in opposition to the writ petition are clearly borne out from the record and could not be dislodged by the petitioner's counsel; the writ petition therefore fails and is liable to be dismissed. ¶19

Shravan Kumar vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 8218 of 2026

¶3

Shravan Kumar

¶4

.....Petitioner(s)

¶5

	Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others	.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s)	: Vipul Kumar Singh, Vivek Kushwaha
Counsel for Respondent(s)	: G.A.

¶6

Court No. - 49

¶7

HON'BLE RAJEEV MISRA, J. HON'BLE PADAM NARAIN MISHRA, J.

¶8

Heard Mr. Vipul Kumar Singh, the learned counsel for petitioner and the learned AGA for State-respondents 1, 2 and 3.

¶9

Supplementary affidavit filed by the learned counsel for petitioner in Court today, is taken on record.

¶10

Perused the record.

¶11

Petitioner- Shravan Kumar has approached this Court by means of present criminal misc. writ petition challenging the FIR dated 18.03.2026 lodged by first informant-respondent-4, Atul Kumar Mishra, Station House Officer, Police Station Jahanaganj, District Azamgarh and registered as Case Crime No. 61 of 2026, under Sections 2(b)(i), 3(1) of U.P. Gangster and Anti Social Activities Act, 1986, Police StationJahanaganj, District Azamgarh.

¶12

Learned Counsel for petitioner in support of present writ petition submits that there is only one criminal case registered against petitioner. As such the criminal prosecution of petitioner under the provisions of Sections 2(b)(i) and Section 3(1) of U.P. Gangster and Anti Social Activities Act, 1986 cannot be sustained. He therefore submits that in view of above, the impugned FIR is liable to be quashed by this Court.

¶13

Per contra, the learned AGA representing State-respondents 1, 2 and 3 has vehemently opposed the present writ petition petition. Learned AGA

¶14

CRLP No. 8218 of 2026

¶15

¶16

contends that the criminal prosecution of an accused for under the provisions of U.P. Gangster and Anti-social Activities (Prevention) Act can be sustained even on the basis of solitary case.

¶17

It is then contended by the learned AGA that the criminal prosecution of petitioner was lodged after complying with the provisions Rule 5(3)(a) of the U.P. Gangster and Anti-social Activities (Prevention) Act, 2021, i.e., after joint meeting of minds. Furthermore, as per the document occurring at page 70 of the supplementary affidavit, it is apparent that categorical reasons have been recorded, on the basis of which, an objective assessment was made and it was concluded that criminal prosecution against petitioner is warranted under the aforementioned Act. On the above premise, the learned A.G.A. thus submits that present writ petition is therefore, liable to be dismissed.

¶18

When confronted with above, the learned counsel for petitioner could not over come the same.

¶19

Having heard, the learned counsel for petitioner, the learned A.G.A. for State-respondents 1, 2 and 3 and upon perusal of record, we find that the objections raised by the learned A.G.A. in opposition to present writ petition are clearly borne out from the record. Furthermore, the same could not be dislodged by the learned counsel for petitioner, with reference to the record. In view of above, the present writ petition fails and is liable to be dismissed.

¶20

It is, accordingly, dismissed .

¶21

Interim order, if any, stands vacated.

¶22

(Padam Narain Mishra,J.) (Rajeev Misra,J.)

¶23

May 7, 2026 A.N. Mishra

¶24

Digitally signed by :- AMARNATH MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Shravan Kumar v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shravan Kumar v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Ram Kumar Maurya vs State of U.P. and 8 Others

Rakesh vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Sachin Sharma vs State of U.P. and 8 Others

Mohammed Ghufran Dehelvi vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Samir Langda @ Mohammad Samir vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Suman Devi vs State of U.P. and 5 Others