Dismissed¶14

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

Allahabad HC25 Mar 2026CRLR/2394/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allahabad High Court; Criminal Revision (CRLR) No. 2394 of 2026; Rajesh Pandey v. State of U.P. and Another; Manoj Bajaj, J.; decided 20.05.2026; U.P. Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, Section 2/3; District Magistrate Ghaziabad approval; non-speaking approval argument; gang chart analysis; discharge application rejected; charges framed; Special Sessions Trial No.2961 of 2023; Case Crime No.1375 of 2022; P.S. Kavi Nagar, Ghaziabad; Shabbir Husain (27.06.2025) distinguished/not helpful; N.D.P.S. Act cases; Section 420 I.P.C.; criminal revision dismissed; no interference with framing of charges.

What did the court decide?

As per the gang chart, the petitioner is involved in four cases, including three cases under the N.D.P.S. Act and one more case under Section 420 I.P.C. ¶9

Rajesh Pandey vs State of U.P. and Another — Narcotics (NDPS) | Allahabad HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

¶14

Issue for consideration

Whether the approval granted by the District Magistrate, Ghaziabad under the U.P. Gangsters Act was non-speaking, so as to warrant interference with the trial court's order rejecting the petitioner's discharge application and framing charges against him.

¶8

Court's answer

As per the gang chart, the petitioner is involved in four cases, including three cases under the N.D.P.S. Act and one more case under Section 420 I.P.C.

¶9

Ratio / Principle

The District Magistrate, Ghaziabad granted approval after carefully analyzing the gang chart and the material appended with it.

¶12

Key takeaways

The approval cannot be said to be non-speaking, as the officer applied his mind to the accompanying documents; therefore it cannot be said that the approval is improper.ratio¶12
The decision relied upon by the petitioner (Shabbir Husain and another Vs. State of U.P. and others, decided on 27.06.2025) is not helpful to his case.ratio¶12
This Court is not inclined to interfere with the impugned order framing charges against the petitioner.ratio

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Criminal revision by an accused (Rajesh Pandey) challenging the order dated 17.09.2025 of the Special Judge (Gangsters Act)/Additional District and Sessions Judge, Court No.12, Ghaziabad, rejecting his discharge application and framing charges in Special Sessions Trial No.2961 of 2023 (State of U.P. Vs. Jitendra and others), arising out of Case Crime No.1375 of 2022 under Section 2/3, U.P. Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, P.S. Kavi Nagar, Ghaziabad: DISMISSED. Held: (i) per the gang chart, the petitioner is involved in four cases, three under the N.D.P.S. Act and one under Section 420 I.P.C.; (ii) the District Magistrate, Ghaziabad granted approval after carefully analyzing the gang chart and the material appended with it, and the approval cannot be said to be non-speaking or improper as the officer applied his mind to the accompanying documents; (iii) the decision in Shabbir Husain and another Vs. State of U.P. and others (decided 27.06.2025), relied upon by the petitioner, is not helpful; (iv) no interference is warranted with the impugned order framing charges. (Manoj Bajaj, J.; May 20, 2026.)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 2394 of 2026

¶3

Rajesh Pandey

¶4

	Versus	....	.Revisionist(s)
State of U.P. and Another			.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Revisionist(s)	:	Pradeep Kumar	Pandey
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	:	G.A.

¶5

Court No. - 85

¶6

HON'BLE MANOJ BAJAJ, J.

¶7

Petitioner-Accused has filed this revision petition to challenge the impugned order dated 17.09.2025 passed by Special Judge (Gangsters Act)/Additonal District and Sessions Judge, court No.12, Ghaziabad in Special Sessions Trial No.2961 of 2023, titled State of U.P. Vs. Jitendra and others , arising out of Case Crime No.1375 of 2022, udner Section 2/3 U.P. Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, registered at Police Station Kavi Nagar, district Ghaziabad, whereby discharge application filed by the petitioner has been rejected.

¶8

Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the trial court has proceeded to frame the charges against the petitioner in a mechanical manner and has not examined the gang chart properly, wherein the approval granted by District Magistrate, Ghaziabad is non-speaking. Learned counsel has relied upon the decision in Shabbir Husain and another Vs. State of U.P. and others, decided on 27.06.2025 to contend that the approval by the statutory authorities under Gangsters act has to be given by application of mind, therefore, on this ground alone, the impugned order calls for interference by this Court. He prays that the impugned order be set aside and the petitioner be discharged.

¶9

After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner and considering his submissions, this Court finds that as per gang chart, the petitioner is involved in four cases including three cases under N.D.P.S. Act and one more case under Section 420 I.P.C. The gang chart relied upon by the

¶10

CRLR No. 2394 of 2026

¶11

¶12

prosecution is also appended as Annexure-2 and a careful examination of the same shows that the District Magistrate, Ghaziabad has granted approval after carefully analyzing the gang chart as well as material appended with it. The approval by the District Magistrate, Ghaziabad cannot be said to be non-speaking as the officer has applied his mind to the accompanying documents, therefore, it cannot be said that the approval is improper. Thus, the decision relied upon by the petitioner is not helpful. As a result this Court is not inclined to interfere with the impugned order framing charges against the petitioner.

¶13

No other argument has been raised.

¶14

Resultantly, the revision fails and is hereby dismissed.

¶15

(Manoj Bajaj,J.)

¶16

May 20, 2026 R./

¶17

Digitally signed by :- RAJEEV KUMAR SACHDEVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Umesh Rai and Another vs State of U.P. and Another

Ramayan Gupta vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Danish vs State of U.P. through Principal Secretary (Home), Lucknow and Another

Satish Rai vs State of U.P. and Another

Arjun vs State of Up and 5 Others

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