1. Appeal against the refusal to quash an FIR registered under special legislation concerning organized crime activities and unauthorized gang activity designation. (Para 2 , 3 )
Back
Next 
2026 Supreme(SC) 293
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
SANJAY KUMAR, K. VINOD CHANDRAN, JJ.
Gabbar Singh alias Devendra Pratap Singh Alias Rajesh Singh – Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. and Ors. – Respondents
Criminal Appeal Nos. 1543-1544 of 2026 [@Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No. 17929-17930 of 2025]
Decided On : 20-03-2026
Important Points
IMPORTANT POINT
Criminal activities – Refusal to quash FIR – When a particular thing is to be done, it should be done in the manner stipulated; statutorily prescribed, or not at all – Especially when at stake is liberty of an individual, precious to all and possible of breach only in accordance with law.
Criminal activities – Refusal to quash FIR – When a particular thing is to be done, it should be done in the manner stipulated; statutorily prescribed, or not at all – Especially when at stake is liberty of an individual, precious to all and possible of breach only in accordance with law.
Subject
Criminal Law - FIR Quashing
Act Referred
Headnote
Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 – Sections 3(1) and 5(3)(d) – Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Rules, 2021 – Rule 16 – Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – Section 482 [Section 528 of BNSS] – Criminal activities – Refusal to quash FIR – Certified copy of Gang Chart received from Court to which FIR was transmitted did not have signatures of various authorities including that of Nodal Officer who is said to have initiated recommendation – Prescription also is that there should be express recommendation by Additional Superintendent of Police, satisfaction of which has to be arrived at by both Superintendent of Police and District Magistrate by affixing their signatures to that document after a joint meeting – Even if Gang Chart was forwarded by Nodal Officer to Jurisdictional Court, it should have contained recommendation and signature of Nodal Officer – It cannot be condoned since FIR registered on strength of Gang Chart should have acquired that status under Act and Rules, by following prescribed procedure – When a particular thing is to be done, it should be done in the manner stipulated; statutorily prescribed, or not at all – Especially when at stake is liberty of an individual, precious to all and possible of breach only in accordance with law – More so in precarious nature of law, which permits mere naming of a person, as a gangster and automatic condemnation, with perilous consequences – No reason to sustain order of High Court and allow criminal proceedings to be continued on the basis of FIR registered – FIR quashed since Gang Chart accompanying FIR was not one as prescribed under Act of 1986 and Rules of 2021 – Prescription under Section 5(3)(d) shall not disable Authorities from taking any action in accordance with Act and Rules. (Paras 10, 11 and 12)
Facts of the case:
Instant appeals are filed against impugned orders declining prayer for quashing of FIR and rejecting review filed against said order. FIR was filed under Section 3(1) of Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986.
Findings of Court:
In precarious nature of law, which permits mere naming of a person, as a gangster and automatic condemnation, which perilous consequences we leave to be considered in an appropriate case.
Result : Appeals allowed.
Legal Category Hierarchy
Advocates appeared:
For the Appellant : Mr. Vishwajit Singh, Sr. Adv., Ms. Veera Kaul Singh, AOR, Mr. Rohan Choudhary, Adv.
For the Respondents: Mr. Namit Saxena, AOR
For the Appellant : Mr. Vishwajit Singh, Sr. Adv., Ms. Veera Kaul Singh, AOR, Mr. Rohan Choudhary, Adv.
For the Respondents: Mr. Namit Saxena, AOR
Table of Contents
2. Petitioner asserted non-compliance with statutory procedures for filing a Gang Chart, while the State argued procedural adherence and individual criminality necessitated action. (Para 4 , 5 )
3. The Gang Chart lacked mandated signatures, specific recommendations, and proof of a required joint meeting among authorities, thus failing to meet statutory and procedural requirements. (Para 6 , 8 , 9 , 10 )
4. Statutory procedures governing the preparation and verification of sensitive documents like Gang Charts must be scrupulously followed to satisfy the requirements for valid criminal proceedings. (Para 10 , 11 )
5. The court set aside the lower court orders and quashed the FIR due to glaring procedural irregularities in the Gang Chart preparation. (Para 12 , 14 )
6. What are the procedural requirements for a valid Gang Chart under the Gangsters Act and Rules?
A valid Gang Chart requires a clear recommendation by the SHO and Additional Superintendent of Police, followed by approval from the Superintendent of Police and District Magistrate, culminating from a mandatory joint meeting. (Para 6 , 8 , 9 , 10 )
7. Can procedural irregularities in the preparation of a Gang Chart justify the quashing of an FIR?
Yes, if a document is meant to be prepared according to a specific statutory manner, failure to comply with that procedure warrants the quashing of resulting proceedings to protect individual liberty. (Para 10 , 11 , 12 )
JUDGMENT :
K. VINOD CHANDRAN, J.
Leave granted.
2. The appeals are filed against the impugned orders declining the prayer for quashing of an FIR and rejecting the review filed against the said order. FIR No.0125 of 2022 dated 28.05.2022 was filed under Section 3(1) of the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 (hereinafter referred to as, ‘the Act of 1986’) at the Police Station Kotwali Nagar, District Bahraich. The High Court, after perusal of the Gang Chart produced as Annexure 2, found a number of criminal cases registered against the three different petitioners, one of whom is before us in the above appeals. It was also noticed that all the petitioners before the High Court were in jail, presumably arrested under the various criminal cases pending against them.
3. Under the Act of 1986 the petitioners were alleged to be members of a gang as defined therein indulging in activities specifically of land grabbing, fraudulent land transactions, extortion, voluntarily causing hurt, criminal intimidation, breach of peace, cheating, forgery and so on and so forth, many of which offences singly and together are alleged in the various crimes registered against them. The captioned FIR filed under the Act of 1986 relied solely on the Gang Chart drawn up, which was challenged before the High Court. The High Court noticing the various decisions, on interference in criminal proceedings by quashing the FIR or the charge sheet, found a prima facie case made out against the petitioners including the appellant herein and declined relief.
4. The learned Senior Counsel appearing for the appellant, restricted the challenge to the procedure adopted under the Act of 1986 and the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Rules, 2021 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Rules of 2021’). Reliance was also placed on Vinod Bihari Lal v. State of Uttar Pradesh , 2025 SCC Online SC 1216. The learned Senior Counsel based on the documents produced in the records would contend that the Gang Chart filed along with the FIR was not in accordance with the prescription in the Rules of 2021, a certified copy of which; obtained from the Court to which the FIR was transmitted from the police station in which it was registered, having no signatures on it.
5. The learned Government Advocate for the State on the other hand, contended that the Nodal Officer who is the Station House Officer had forwarded the Gang Chart to the concerned Court at the first instance, when he had forwarded the same to the Additional Superintendent of Police. The original of the Gang Chart as produced by the appellant himself was specifically pointed out to show the different dates in which the various authorities had signed the same as prescribed under the Rules of 2021. The appellant is the leader of the gang, indulging in so many illegal activities raising threats and intimidation against the general public and is a menace to the society at large is the argument.
6. We would confine ourselves to the contention raised with respect to the prescription and the rules having not been followed to the letter, which is essential and necessary. Annexure P1 is the FIR registered on 28.05.2022 along with which is produced the Gang Chart as transmitted, presumably by the Nodal Officer. A Gang Chart mandates the recommendation of the Nodal Officer and the Additional Superintendent of Police, approved by the Superintendent of Police and the District Magistrate, the recommendations in the written form and the approval by affixing of signatures. Neither are the recommendations mandated are available nor the signatures of anyone visible in Annexure P1.
7. As pointed out by the learned Government Advocate for the State, Exhibit P4 shows the Nodal Officer and the Additional Superintendent of Police having signed the same with their express recommendations on 20.05.2022 and the Superintendent of Police and the District Magistrate having approved it by affixing t
