The judgment addresses systemic failures in policing and the relevance of accountability in prosecuting organized crime under the Gangsters Act.

VINOD DIWAKAR, J.

1. In compliance with the order dated 12.11.2025, Shri Anup Trivedi, learned A.A.G., assisted by Shri Vibhav Anand Singh, learned A.G.A., has produced the instructions dated 26.11.2025, which are taken on record.

2. Upon examining the instructions, the justification provided by the Home Department is largely theoretical rather than one derived from empirical data. Reliance has been placed on certain provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure-namely Sections 107, 117, 133, 144 and 145 Cr.P.C.- to justify excluding the District Magistrate(s) from the mandatory requirement under Rule 5(3)(a) of the U.P. Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Rules, 2021, about participation in the joint meeting in Commissionerate areas.

3. The instructions further contains the details about the compliance affidavit filed by the Principal Secretary, Home Department, Government of Uttar Pradesh, and places reliance on the notification dated 26.11.2022 issued under Section 20(2) of the Cr.P.C. replacing SSP and District Magistrate by Commissioner of Police (CP) and Deputy Commissioner of Police (DCP) in districts with police Commissionerate system so far as provisions of Gangsters Act are concerned, besides other Acts.

4. As per instructions, the District Magistrate is the head of the criminal administration of the district and occupies the pre-eminent position in taking a decision in matters concerning action(s) against organized criminals; however, in the police Commissionerate system, the Police Commissioner is the head of the criminal administration in the district. The Police Commissioner also functions as the head of the 'Executive Magistracy' in the districts and supervises the preventive proceedings under sections 107-116, 113, 144 & 154 of the Cr.P.C. Additional details have also been provided regarding the professional profiles of the District Magistrate and the Commissioner of Police.

5. The instructions further disclose that police Commissionerates have predominantly been established in metropolitan cities of Uttar Pradesh having a population of more than 10 lacs. In metropolitan areas, the nature and volume of urban crime are different vis-à-vis their rural counterparts. Unlike rural districts where crime is often driven by local disputes and mitigated by community cohesion, metropolitan centres in Uttar Pradesh serve as hubs for sophisticated organised crime, including complex financial fraud, real estate syndicates, and cyber extortion. Data confirms that these areas bear a disproportionate share of the national crime rate, necessitating a highly specialized and agile response mechanism. Minimizing the administrative layer of the DM ensures that law enforcement agencies can rapidly dismantle these fast-moving criminal networks without bureaucratic latency. Since urban policing requires technical expertise in areas like economic offences and digital forensics-capabilities housed within the police force rather than the revenue administrations-direct police oversight ensures more effective enforcement against modern gangsterism.

6. The counter affidavit filed by the Principal Secretary (Home) and the instructions dated 27.11.2025 place substantial reliance on the proposition that the State is empowered to declare any district as a metropolitan area for administrative purposes, and that upon such declaration, the powers of the District Magistrate stand vested in the Commissioner of Police in terms of the notification dated 26.11.2022. For the avoidance of doubt, it is made clear that this Court entertains no confusion with respect to the authority of the legislative or executive branch to declare any district as a metropolitan area or to establish a Commissionerate for the purposes of administration and maintenance of law and order. The Court is with the Home Department on that count, and needs no clarification.

7. The concern of the Court lies elsewhere: namely, the recurring misuse of police powers and the over-a