Farhana vs The State Of Uttar Pradesh on 19 February, 2024

Supreme Court of India

Farhana vs The State Of Uttar Pradesh on 19 February, 2024

Author: B.R. Gavai

Bench: B.R. Gavai

2024 INSC 118
                                                                   NON-REPORTABLE

                                  IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
                                 CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                                CRIMINAL APPEAL NO(S).             OF 2024
                                (Arising out of SLP(Crl.) No(s). 437 of 2023)


             FARHANA                                                …..APPELLANT(S)


                                 VERSUS


             STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ORS.                          ..RESPONDENT(S)

                                                WITH

                                 CRIMINAL APPEAL NO(S).             OF 2024
                                (Arising out of SLP(Crl.) No(s). 3169 of 2023)


                                             JUDGMENT

Mehta, J.

1. Leave granted.

2. Heard learned counsel representing the parties and perused

the material available on record.

3. The appellants-Farhana and Sadarul Islam have filed the

instant appeals for assailing the orders dated 14th November, 2022
Signature Not Verified

Digitally signed by
Deepak Singh

and 6th December, 2022 passed by the Division Bench of the High
Date: 2024.02.19
16:21:23 IST
Reason:

Court of Judicature at Allahabad rejecting Criminal Miscellaneous

1
Writ Petition Nos. 16653 of 2022 and 18326 of 2022 preferred by

the appellants respectively, with a prayer to quash the Case Crime

No. 424 of 2022 registered against the appellants for the offence

punishable under Section 3(1) of the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and

Anti-Social Activities(Prevention) Act, 1986(for short ‘Gangsters

Act’) at Police Station-Bhognipur, District-Kanpur Dehat.

4. The short issue presented for adjudication in these appeals

is as to whether the proceedings of the FIR under the provisions of

the Gangsters Act and the prosecution of the accused can be

continued in spite of exoneration in the predicate offences covered

by Section 2(b)(i) of Gangsters Act. For the sake of convenience,

Section 2(b)(i) of the Gangsters Act is quoted hereinbelow:-

“2(b) “Gang” means a group of persons, who acting either
singly or collectively, by violence, or threat or show of
violence, or intimidation, or coercion or otherwise with the
object of disturbing public order or of gaining any undue
temporal, pecuniary, material or other advantage for himself
or any other person, indulge in anti-social activities,
namely—

(i) offences punishable under Chapter XVI, or
Chapter XVII, or Chapter XXII of the
Indian Penal Code, or…..”

5. The FIR impugned before the High Court came to be

registered against the appellants at the instance of the inspector

in-charge of the Police Station, Kanpur Dehat alleging inter alia

that the appellants, being the members of a gang led by Puskal

2
Parag Dubey, were involved in following criminal cases:- (1) Crime

Case No. 190 of 2021 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 323, 504

and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860(for short ‘IPC’) and

(2)Crime Case No. 173 of 2019 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471

IPC against Sadarul Islam and (3) Crime Case No. 173 of 2019

under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC against Farhana and, thus,

they were liable to be prosecuted for the offences punishable under

the Gangsters Act. The FIR further narrated that the gang has

criminal history and with a view to impose a restriction on the

activities of the gang, the FIR was being registered after obtaining

prior approval pertaining to the Gang Chart from the District

Magistrate under Section 3(1) of the Gangsters Act.

6. The appellants assailed the aforesaid FIR by way of filing the

captioned criminal writ petitions before the High Court on the

premise that as on the date of the filing of the FIR, only one case

was registered against them and hence, the proceedings under

Section 3(1) of the Gangsters Act were liable to be quashed and set

aside.

7. Learned Division Bench of the High Court of Judicature at

Allahabad considered the ratio of the judgment rendered by this

Court in the case of Shraddha Gupta v. State of Uttar Pradesh

3
and Others1 wherein it was held that prosecution under the

Gangsters Act can be initiated even against the person who is

involved in a single offence/FIR/charge-sheet for any of the anti-

social activities mentioned in Section 2(b) of the Gangsters Act and

rejected the criminal writ petitions by the impugned orders dated

14th November, 2022 and 6th December, 2022 which have been

assailed in the present appeals.

8. Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the

decision rendered in the case of Shraddha Gupta(supra) would

not apply to the case of the appellants because in the intervening

period, proceedings of both the criminal cases being Crime Case

No. 173 of 2019 and Crime Case No. 190 of 2021 have been

quashed in the following manner:- (i) Crime Case No. 173 of

2019 registered against both the appellants, namely, Farhana and

Sadarul Islam was quashed by the High Court of Judicature at

Allahabad, vide order dated 3rd March, 2023, passed in Application

under Section 482 No. 7228 of 2023; (ii) Crime Case No. 190 of

2021 registered against appellant Sadarul Islam was also quashed

by the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad vide order dated 18th

1
2022 SCCOnline SC 514
4
October, 2023, passed in Application under Section 482 No. 18493

of 2023.

9. On these grounds, learned counsel for the appellants urged

that there being no on-going prosecution of the appellants for any

offence(s) involving anti-social activities as defined in Section 2(b)(i)

of the Gangsters Act, the continuation of the proceedings of the

criminal case and the charge-sheet filed against the appellants

pursuant to investigation of Case Crime No. 424 of 2022 under the

Gangsters Act is absolutely unjustified and tantamounts to abuse

of process of the Court.

10. On these submissions, he implored the Court to accept the

appeals and quash the proceedings of the criminal case pending

against the appellants in the jurisdictional Court.

11. Per contra, learned counsel representing the State urged that

there is no dispute that at the time of registration of FIR, the

appellants were being prosecuted for multiple FIRs involving anti-

social offences as defined under Section 2(b)(i) of the Gangsters Act

and hence, the proceedings of the FIR under the Gangsters Act

cannot be quashed in light of decision rendered by this Court in

the case of Shraddha Gupta(supra).

5

12. From a bare perusal of Section 2(b)(i) of the Gangsters Act, it

would become apparent that the person alleged to be the member

of the gang should be found indulging in anti-social activities

which would be covered under the offences punishable under

Chapters XVI, or XVII or XXII IPC. There is no dispute that the

case set up by the prosecution against the appellants insofar as

the offences under the Gangsters Act are concerned, is limited to

Section 2(b)(i) reproduced supra and none of the other clauses of

the provision have been pressed into service for the proposed

prosecution.

13. Needless to say that for framing a charge for the offence under

the Gangsters Act and for continuing the prosecution of the

accused under the above provisions, the prosecution would be

required to clearly state that the appellants are being prosecuted

for any one or more offences covered by anti-social activities as

defined under Section 2(b).

14. There being no dispute that in the proceedings of the sole FIR

registered against the appellants for the offences under Chapter

XVII IPC being Crime Case No. 173 of 2019, the appellants stand

exonerated with the quashing of the said FIR by the High Court of

Judicature at Allahabad by exercising the powers under Section

6
482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, vide order dated 3rd

March, 2023 passed in Application No. 7228 of 2023.

15. Hence, the very foundation for continuing the prosecution of

the appellants under the provisions of the Gangsters Act stands

struck off and as a consequence, the continued prosecution of the

appellants for the said offence is unjustified and tantamounts to

abuse of the process of Court.

16. As a consequence of the discussion made herein above, the

impugned orders dated 14th November, 2022 and 6th December,

2022 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad are

quashed and set aside. Resultantly, the impugned FIR being

Crime Case No.424 of 2022 for offence punishable under Section

3(1) of the Gangsters Act, registered at Police Station- Bhognipur,

District- Kanpur Dehat and all the proceedings sought to be taken

thereunder against the appellants are hereby quashed.

17. The appeals are allowed accordingly.

18. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.

……..……………………J.
(J.B. PARDIWALA)

……..……………………J.
(SANDEEP MEHTA)
New Delhi;

February 19, 2024

7