SUSHIL vs STATE OF UTTARAKHAND - 2021 Supreme(UK) 770

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2021 Supreme(UK) 770

UTTARAKHAND HIGH COURT
Hon’ble Mr. Justice Lok Pal Singh
Criminal Appeal No. 126 of 2019
SUSHIL – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF UTTARAKHAND – Respondent
Decided on : 14.01.2021

Advocates:
.For the Appellant :Mr. M.S. Pal, Learned Senior Advocate assisted by Ms. Charanjeet Kaur, Advocate
For the Respondent: Mr. Subhash Tyagi Bhardwaj, Learned Dy. Adv. General with Ms. Shivangi Gangwar, Learned Brief Holder

Headnote:
U.P. Gangsters and Anti Social (Prevention) Activities Act, 1986, Sec. 2/3 – Conviction under – The gang chart and its approval by the Superintendent of Police is not the evidence that the accused named therein had formed a gang or member of gang to commit organized crime for material or financial benefits or to disturb the public order – Thus, impugned judgment passed by the trial court, unsustainable, set aside. (Paras 10 to 15)
mÙkj izns’k xSaxLVj vkSj vlkekftd xfrfof/k;k¡ ¼jksdFkke½ vf?kfu;e] 1986] èkkjk 2@3 & nks”kflf) & xSax pkVZ dk iqfyl v/kh{kd }kjk vuqeksnu] lk{; ugha fd lwph esa ntZ vfHk;qDr }kjk xSax cuk;k x;k Fkk ;k og fdlh xSax dk lnL; Fkk] tks fd rkfRod] foÙkh; ykHkksa ds vijk/kksa ds fy, ;k iqfyl vkns’k dks vLr O;Lr djus ds fy, xfBr fd;k x;k Fkk & fopkj.k vnkyr }kjk ikfjr fojksf/kr vkns’k] lrr~ ugha] [kkfjtA
¼izLrj 10 ls 15½

JUDGMENT

Hon'ble Lok Pal Singh, J.

This appeal has been preferred against the judgment and order dated 18.02.2019, passed by the Special Judge/3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Haridwar in S.S.T. No. 11 of 2009, State vs. Praveen Balmiki & Ors., whereby the said court has convicted the appellant Sushil under section 2/3 of U.P. Gangsters and Anti Social (Prevention) Activities Act, 1986 (hereinafter referred as the Act) and sentenced him to rigorous imprisonment for a period of 10 years and directed to pay fine of Rs. 10,000/-, in default of which accused/appellant to undergo further three months' simple imprisonment.

2. Brief facts, in nutshell, are that the informant Incharge Inspector Sri B.S. Chauhan gave a report with the averments that on 24.07.2008 when he along with Constable Sandeep Kumar and constable Ravi Pant was on patrolling duty, he was informed by the villagers that there is active gang of Praveen Balmiki who is its leader, which runs with the help of its associates namely Sushil (present accused/appellant), Narendra and Pappu. The gang has been involved in the commission of the offences like dacoity, murder, extortion etc., and due to their act, there is terror in the society and, therefore, nobody lodged any report or gives any evidence against the member of the gang. In the gang chart (Ex. A1) against present accused Sushil case crime no. 125 of 2008, under sections 302/307, 506, 34 and 120B IPC , case crime no. 107 of 2005 under section 147, 148, 149, 302, 34 IPC and case crime no. 54 of 2000 under section 302 and 120B IPC are registered at police station Kotwali Gangnahar , against Praveen Balmiki case crime no. 125 of 2008 under section 302/307, 506, 34 and 120B IPC, case crime no. 291 of 2006 under sections 392, 411, 120B IPC, case crime no. 77 of 2006 under sections 302 IPC and case crime no. 372 of 2006 under section 25 Arms Act, against Naresh case crime no. 125 of 2008 under section 302/307, 506, 34 and 120B IPC, case crime no. 298 of 2007 under section 308 IPC and against accused Pappu case crime no. 125 of 2006 under section 302/307, 506, 34 and 120B IPC and , case crime no.107 of 2005 under section 147, 148, 149, 302, 34 IPC are registered at Police Station Kotwali Gangnahar, Roorkee, Laksar and Manglaur.

3. On the basis of said report FIR (Ex. A4) was got lodged and case crime no. 211 of 2008, under section 2/3 of the Act was registered. After grant of approval of the gang chart by the District Magistrate and on completion of investigation, charge sheet was submitted against the present accused/appellant by the Investigating Officer. The learned Sessions Judge framed the charge under section 2/3 of the Act against the accused/appellant to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

4. To prove the guilt of the accused/appellant, the prosecution got examined ten witnesses, namely, P.W.1 Inspector Bahadur Singh Chauhan,( complainant) P.W.2 Sachin (informant in another case) P.W.3 Sub-Inspector Dinesh Kumar (Investigating officer of case crime no. 231 of 2006), P.W. 4 Shahazad (complainant of another case) P.W.5 Inspector Vijay Chandra Singh Gusain (Investigating officer of case crime no. 211 of 2008), P.W.6 Swyamwar Singh Rautela, P.W. 7 S.I. Bhupendra Mehta, P.W. 8 Cons. Sandeep Kumar, P.W.9 Vikas Kumar Salar, and P.W.10 Atul Kumar.

5. The oral and documentary evidence was put to the accused under section 313 Cr.P.C. in reply to which he alleged that he has been falsely implicated in the case. He further stated that in case crime no. 107 of 2005 and case crime no. 54 of 2000 he has already been acquitted and case crime no. 125 of 2008 is pending consideration (acquitted by the trial court vide judgment and order dated 29.09.2018). However, no evidence in defence was adduced. The trial court after hearing learned counsel for the parties found that prosecution has successfully proved the guilt of the accused beyond the shadow of doubt and convicted him accordingly. Aggrieved by the impugned judgm