Hon’ble Uma Nath Singh, J.—Affidavit filed by State is taken on record.

Heard learned counsel for parties and perused the materials on record.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioners, at the outset, made a limited prayer that the impugned order taking cognizance under the U.P. Gangsters & Anti-Social activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 (for short, ‘the Gangsters Act’) only on the basis of case crime No. 144 of 2007 registered under Section 307,323,506 and 427 IPC against the petitioners would not be sustainable in Law. It is contended that the FIR in question was lodged in respect of an incident which occurred when the complainant side came to take forcible possession of a disputed land. The Settlement Officer, Consolidation, in an appeal by one Maqbool Ahmad, father-in-law of petitioner No. 1 Nafees, relating to the land in question had remanded the matter for afresh consideration which was pending before the Consolidation Officer at the time of incident. According to the learned counsel, the occurrence in question cannot be said to be an act of disturbing the public order or indulging in anti-social activities. Moreover, the land was purchased by Maqbool Ahmad, brother of pe