ORDER :

1. All these writ petitions involve an identical question and therefore they have been heard and are being decided by a common order.

2. Heard Shri N.I Jafri, learned Senior Advocate for the petitioners and learned AGA for the State-respondents.

3. Writ Petition No.6174 of 2023 seeks quashing of the first information report dated 28.03.2023 giving rise to Case Crime No.76 of 2023 seeks quashing of the first information reports dated 25.03.2023, under Section 2/3 of Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Rules, 2021, Police Station Saiyan, District Agr and Writ Petition Nos.5725 of 2023, 5373 of 2023, 5502 of 2023 and 5947 of 2923 seeks quashing of the first information reports dated 25.03.2023, under Section 2/3(1) of Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, Police Station Kotwali, District Ballia.

4. The contention of counsel for the petitioners is that there is violation of Rule 16(3) of the Uttar Pradesh Gangster and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 as the District Magistrate has granted approval to the gang chart mindlessly without proper perusal of the facts. Such violation vitiates the impugned first information report.

5. The next contention is that the petitioners do not constitute a gang as they are not covered by the definition of the gang as provided under Section 2(b) of the Act.

6. It is next submitted that a dumper belonging to the petitioner no.3 was seized at Saiyan Toll Plaza by the Toll Barrier Staff and the police during checking as is alleged in the first information report in the base case. The dumper was over-loaded with mineral dust. It was being driven by Achal Singh and his co-driver was B.S. Parmar. The truck was owned by Amit Mittal and that there is no documentation regarding a sand stone dust being transported. The number plate had been blackened to hide the registration number. It was also alleged that the driver was in constant touch with the owner of the dumper through a whatsapp group whose admins are petitioner nos.1 and 3.

7. It is next contended that the impugned First Information Report under the Gangsters Act is malicious prosecution as the police has not been able to collect any material during investigation of the base case to justify invocation of the provisions of the Gangsters Act against the petitioners. There is no independent witness of the alleged seizure. The vehicle has in any case being released in favour of the petitioner no.3. The minerals being loaded in the dumper was being transported with a valid pass for the same and the royalty of these minerals had been duly paid.

8. It is lastly contended that since the mineral and sand were loaded on the dumper, the same flow out obscured the number plate and had not been obfuscated deliberately.

9. Learned AGA has refuted the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioners and has submitted that the petitioners fall within the definition of a gang as provided under Section 2(b), which includes 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.

10. It is submitted that the allegation in the base case is of transportation of the minerals and the same is necessarily for pecuniary advantage. The petitioners are therefore, fully covered by the definition of the word chart in Section 2(b) of the Act. The First Information Report therefore, cannot be quashed.

11. We have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and have perused the record.

12. We have substance in the submission of learned AGA that any illegal transportation of minerals would entail undue pecuniary or material or other advantage to the persons responsible for the transportation and therefore, the petitioners are covered by definition of the word gang in Section 2