Allahabad High Court quashed a Charge-Sheet under Gangster Act.
Updated: Jun 16, 2021
Allahabad High Court proceeded to quash a Criminal 482 Application which was pending since 2004 and a Charge-Sheet under Section 3(1)(ii) of the U.P. Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 was under challenge.
The question before the Court was, whether mere conviction in a previously registered criminal case or the fact that crimes are registered against a person for past offences is a ground to launch a prosecution under the Act, 1986 by simply perusing the cases registered
against a person. There should be something done in proesenti, some conduct or action of the kind that can fall within the mischief of Section 2/3 of the Act.
The Court was pleased to observe that, "there is nothing said or indicated that any such act was done contemporaneous to the registration of the FIR, giving rise to the impugned charge-sheet, that may bring the applicant within the definition of a Gangster, except the registration of those cases against him, in one of which he has been subsequently acquitted and in one convicted. A subsequent acquittal or conviction, in two of the three cases, may not be strictly relevant but the fact that there is nothing indicated as to what are those elements of an offence under this Act that are made out, renders the impugned prosecution merely on the basis of past cases registered, whatever result they might have led to, vitiated and liable to be quashed as a process abuse. This Court, is therefore, of opinion that permitting the impugned prosecution to continue would be an abuse of process of Court."
Lastly, the Court held that, "mere conviction in a previously registered criminal case or the fact that crimes are registered for past offences is not a ground to launch a prosecution under the Gangster Act, just by perusing cases registered against a person. There should be something done in proesenti, some conduct or action of the kind that can fall within the mischief of Section 2/3 of the Act."
The matter was argued by Mr. Devesh Saxena, Managing Partner, S&D Legal Associates under the guidance of his senior Mr. Kartikeya Saran, Advocate.
(Image Source: )