Reserved on 17.05.2022

Delivered on 07.06.2022

Court No. - 51

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 28963 of 2021

Applicant :- Abusad

Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another

Counsel for Applicant :- Shabana Nizam

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

Hon'ble Raj Beer Singh,J.

1. This application under Section 482 CrPC has been filed for quashing of

entire proceedings including the charge-sheet of case no.70/2020,

(State Vs. Danish and others), case crime No. 69/2020, under Section 3(1) of

U.P. Gangster and Antisocial Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, P.S.

Nizamabad, District Azamgarh, pending in the court of Special Judge,

Gangster, Azamgarh.

2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State

and perused the record.

3. It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicant that applicant was

falsely implicated in case crime no.137/2019, under Section 3/5/8 of Cow

Slaughter Act and Section 11 Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act and in

that case he has already been granted bail by this Court, vide order dated

05.03.2020, passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.10456/2020 and

thereafter, the first information report of instant case has been lodged,

making false and baseless allegations that applicant and co-accused persons

were indulging in illegal transportation and business of beef and that

applicant is a member of the gang. The applicant has filed a petition for

quashing of the first information report, which was disposed of, vide order

dated 22.06.2020 by this Court, wherein, it was directed that applicant shall

not be arrested in the said case till submission of police report under Section

173(2) of CrPC. It was submitted that on the basis of single case, the

provisions of Gangsters Act can not be invoked and applicant can not be

termed a gangster. The police did not investigate the case properly and the

charge-sheet has been filed in a routine manner. There is no material or

evidence against applicant to invoke the provisions of U.P. Gangsters and

Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 (hereinafter referred to as the

‘Gangster Act’). In fact the applicant is a driver and poor person and that

during lock-down period the informant of this case has sought his vehicle

but applicant has refused and he has falsely been implicated due to this

reason. Merely, on the basis of one case under section 3/5/8 of Cow

Slaughter Act and section 11 Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, the

provisions of Gangster Act cannot be invoked against applicant, particularly,

when there is no credible evidence against applicant. Applicant was not

apprehended at the spot in that case and nothing was recovered from him

and there is no independent witness in the said case. The applicant is neither

running any gang nor he is member of any gang and that he is not gaining

any pecuniary benefit from any gang and he is not having any illegal

property. Learned counsel submitted that the impugned charge-sheet against

applicant is abuse of the process of law and that no prima facie case is made

out against applicant.

4. Learned AGA has submitted that there is evidence to show that applicant

was a gangster and he was a member of gang and that the charge-sheet has

been submitted after collecting the evidence against him and that a prima

facie case under Section 3(1) of Gangster Act is made out against him.

5. I have considered the rival submissions and perused the record.

6. At the outset, it was mentioned that applicant has not challenged the

summoning order passed by the court below, nor the same has been

appended with the present application. Thus, it is not clear whether the

applicant has been summoned so far or not. The legal position on the issue

of quashing of criminal proceedings is well-settled that the jurisdiction to

quash a complaint, FIR or a charge-sheet should be exercised sparingly and

only in exceptional cases. However, where the allegations made in the FIR