Pre. PREAMBLE

[Act No. 8 of 1971]

An Act - to make special provisions for the control and suppression of Goondas with a view to the maintenance of public order

It is hereby enacted in the Twenty-first Year of the Republic of India as follows:

------------------------------------

1. Published in U.P. Gazette (Extra.) dated 18th January, 19

Legal Comments

• Introduction - The Uttar Pradesh Control of Goondas Act, 1970 is a specialized legislative framework aimed at controlling and suppressing goondas to maintain public order, including preventive measures and enforcement powers granted to district authorities. [LAWGIST - UTTAR PRADESH CONTROL OF GOONDAS ACT, 1970 | §1 Short title and extent]

• What Section Says (Preliminary) - Preliminary provisions define key terms (notably through definitions) and lay down the basic jurisdictional scope and initial framework for the Act, setting the stage for the more specific provisions that follow (externment, return, etc.). [LAWGIST - UTTAR PRADESH CONTROL OF GOONDAS ACT, 1970 | §2 Definitions; §3 Externment, etc. of Goonda]

• Essential ingredients - Essential elements involve identification of a person as a goonda by a District Magistrate, the power to extern or banish a goonda from the district, and procedures for preventing or restricting movement and activities. [India Code - UTTAR PRADESH CONTROL OF GOONDAS ACT, 1970 | §3 Externment, etc. of Goonda]

• Scope of Section - The Act applies within Uttar Pradesh, empowering District Magistrates (and designated authorities) to take preventive action against goondas, including orders that can restrict movement, with procedures for return or challenge. [LAWGIST - UTTAR PRADESH CONTROL OF GOONDAS ACT, 1970 | §3 Externment, etc. of Goonda; §4 Permission to return]

• Punishment for Section - Penalties for contravention of orders issued under sections 3 to 6 include rigorous imprisonment for a term that may extend to specified durations, reflecting the punitive dimension of the regime. [Punishment for contravention of orders under sections 3 to 6. 10. Whoever contravenes any order made under section 3, section 4, section 5 or section 6 shall be punishable with rigorous imprisonment...]

• Preliminary role of notices and due process - The regime contemplates notices and potential inquiries prior to actions, with some enforcement provisions allowing action without a formal preliminary enquiry for FIR registration in certain contexts, highlighting a balance between speed and due process. [The Uttar Pradesh Control of Goondas Act, 1970 allows the district .... ... preliminary enquiry shall not be required for registration of an FIR ...]

• DAS/DM authority and procedures - District Magistrates (and Specially empowered Additional District Magistrates) play central roles in determining goonda status and in issuing externment orders; the act also contemplates attendance and appearance procedures. [Section 2; Section 7(1) - UTTAR PRADESH CONTROL OF GOONDAS ACT, 1970; §7(1)]

• Externalment and return framework - Externment orders banish a goonda from the district or area; the act provides for possible permission to return under defined conditions, regulating mobility as a preventive tool. [LAWGIST - §3 Externment, etc. of Goonda; §4 Permission to return]

• Arrest and detention backdrop - Authorities may arrest without warrant if reasonable suspicion arises under certain provisions; this aligns with the preventive enforcement character of the statute. [Uttar Pradesh Control Of Goondas Act, 1970 | LawRato/Legitquest summaries citing arrest provisions]

• Relationship to rules - The Goondas Rules augment the Act by prescribing internal administrative procedures (e.g., reporting). They complement the main statute in governing enforcement logistics. [The U.P. Control Of Goondas Rules, 1970 - Indian Kanoon]

• Interplay with public order policy - The Act reflects the objective to maintain public order by neutralizing the activities and movements of persons deemed habitual offenders or anti-social elements. [LAWGIST - Goondas Act overview; LawRato summary]

• Judicial scrutiny and misuse concerns - Courts have scrutinized implementation, with notable findings of misuse concerns and cost penalties in cases challenging the misuse or overreach of Externment provisions. [Allahabad High Court cost imposition; case summaries citing misuse concerns]

• Notion of “goonda” definition - The term goonda is a central defining category for triggering preventive measures; the criteria rest with District Magistrate’s assessment and statutory definitions. [Section 2; definitions; case law summaries]

• Notice requirements and preliminary procedures - The Act contemplates timely action but also includes procedural safeguards, with some submissions indicating expedited handling for certain actions (e.g., registration of FIR without preliminary enquiry). [The Uttar Pradesh Control of Goondas Act, 1970 allows preliminary enquiry to be not required for FIR; Indian Kanoon notes]

• Remedies and appeals under preliminary regime - The framework permits certain swift actions while providing a mechanism for challenge and appeal through the legal process, though specific appeal provisions are not exhaustively itemized in the preliminary scope. [Law summaries of sections 3-6; external notes]

• Relation to inter-district actions - If a goonda moves outside UP, the Act contemplates inter-district cooperation; authorities may coordinate with police to manage cross-border concerns. [The Uttar Pradesh Goondas Rules; inter-district transfer references]

• Enforcement risk: potential for overreach - The externally banishing power, if misapplied, risks civil liberty concerns; courts have admonished misuse and imposed costs in related challenges. [Allahabad High Court cost order; commentary on misuse of externment]

• Temporal scope and enactment posture - The Act dates to 1970/1971, situating it in a period of robust preventive detention statutes; it remains in discourse for its preventive public order functions. [UP Act 1970; Indian Code entry]

• Cross-reference with later legislation - The 1971 UP Control of Goondas Act is a related statute; while distinct, it informs the evolution and scope of preventive goonda control within the state. [The Uttar Pradesh Control of Goondas Act, 1971; cross-references in sources]

• Administrative reporting obligations - Rules require the officer in charge of a police station to file fortnightly reports to the District Magistrate, contributing to ongoing monitoring and oversight. [The U.P. Control Of Goondas Rules, 1970 - Indian Kanoon]

• Practical implementation challenges - The combined framework (Act + Rules) necessitates robust administrative capacity to avoid misuse and ensure due process; judicial commentary notes the need for checks and costs when abuses occur. [Rule-based reporting; judicial critiques in sources]

• Quick take on regulatory objective - Overall, the Preliminary provisions set up a regime prioritizing swift preventive action against goondas, with defined roles for District Magistrates, and enabling externment, return controls, and penal consequences for noncompliance. [Synthesis of §2–§4; §3 externment; §6 penalties]

S.1 Short title and extent

(1) This Act may be called the Uttar Pradesh Control of Goondas Act, 1970.

(2) It extends to the whole of Uttar Pradesh.

S.2 Definitions

In this Act, unless the context otherwise requires:-

(a) "District Magistrate" includes an Additional District Magistrate specially empowered by the State Government in that behalf.

¹[(b) "Goonda" means a person who:-

(i) either by himself or as a member or leader of a gang, habitually commits or attempts to commit, or abets the commission of an offence punishable under Section

S.3 Externment, etc. of Goondas

(1) Where it appears to the District Magistrate:-

(a) that any person is a goonda.

(b) (i) that his movements or acts in the district or any part thereof are causing, or are calculated to cause alarm, danger or harm to persons or property.

¹[(ii) that there are reasonable grounds for believing that he is engaged or about to engage, in the district or any part thereof, in the com

Legal Commentary on Section 3 of the Uttar Pradesh Control of Goondas Act, 1970

Introduction

The Uttar Pradesh Control of Goondas Act, 1970, is a legislative measure aimed at curbing the activities of individuals identified as "goondas" or habitual offenders who threaten public order. Section 3 of the Act specifically addresses the externment of such individuals from a district to maintain peace and security.

What does Section 3 Say

Section 3 empowers the District Magistrate to extern individuals identified as goondas from a district if their actions are deemed to threaten public order. The section outlines the procedure for issuing a show-cause notice and the conditions under which externment may occur.

Essential Ingredients

1. Identification as a Goonda: The individual must be classified as a goonda as per the definition provided in Section 2(b).
2. Threat to Public Order: The individual's actions must pose a threat to public order or safety.
3. Show-Cause Notice: The individual must be given an opportunity to respond to the allegations against them before any externment order is issued.

Scope of Section

The scope of Section 3 is preventive rather than punitive, focusing on the removal of individuals who are considered a danger to society. It allows for the issuance of orders that require individuals to notify their movements or report to authorities.

Punishment for Section

Contravention of orders made under Section 3 can lead to punishment, which may include rigorous imprisonment for a term that can extend up to three years.

Legal Comments

• Preventive Nature - The Act is designed as a preventive measure to exclude individuals who are habitual offenders from a locale to maintain public order. This is not a benign measure and carries significant stigma for those affected. - [Pavan @ Pavan Singhal VS State of U. P. ]
• Stigmatization - An externment order under Section 3 is stigmatic, as it classifies an individual as a goonda, impacting their social standing and reputation. - [Pavan @ Pavan Singhal VS State of U. P. ]
• Opportunity to Show Cause - The Act mandates that individuals must be given an opportunity to show cause against the allegations before any externment order is made, ensuring a degree of procedural fairness. - [Pavan @ Pavan Singhal VS State of U. P. ]
• General Nature of Allegations - Notices issued under Section 3 must contain the general nature of material allegations against the individual, failing which they may be deemed invalid. - [Shiv Prasad Gupta VS State of U. P. ]
• Habitual Offending - The classification of an individual as a goonda requires evidence of habitual offending, and a single incident may not suffice for such classification. - [Anmolakram VS State Of U. P. Thru. Secy. Home, Civil Sachivalaya, Lko. ]
• Judicial Oversight - Courts have emphasized the need for careful scrutiny of the grounds for externment, particularly in cases where the allegations stem from matrimonial disputes or trivial offenses. - [Shiv Prasad Gupta VS State of U. P. ]
• Misuse of the Act - There are concerns regarding the rampant misuse of the Act, particularly in cases involving personal disputes, leading to calls for stricter guidelines on its invocation. -
• Requirement of Evidence - The Act requires that the District Magistrate act on credible information, typically from law enforcement or reputable citizens, to justify the issuance of a notice. - [Prashant Tiwari Alias Jammu VS State of U. P. ]
• Alternative Remedies - Courts have held that individuals must exhaust available alternative remedies before challenging the externment orders in higher courts. - [Anmolakram VS State Of U. P. Thru. Secy. Home, Civil Sachivalaya, Lko. ]
• Legality of Notices - Notices issued under Section 3 must be legally sound, containing sufficient material allegations to allow the individual to respond adequately. - [02500109361]
• Public Safety - The overarching goal of the Act is to protect public safety by removing individuals who are perceived as threats to community peace. -
• Judicial Precedents - Various judicial decisions have highlighted the necessity for a well-reasoned order and the importance of not issuing notices based on insufficient grounds. - [Govardhan VS State of U. P. ]
• Impact on Individuals - The consequences of being labeled a goonda can have long-lasting effects on an individual's life, including social ostracism and employment challenges. - [Pavan @ Pavan Singhal VS State of U. P. ]
• Legislative Intent - The legislative intent behind the Act is to ensure that individuals who habitually engage in criminal activities are kept away from communities to prevent further offenses. -
• Procedural Compliance - Authorities are expected to comply with procedural requirements when issuing notices, ensuring that the rights of the individuals are respected. - [Govardhan VS State of U. P. ]
• Community Involvement - The Act allows for community involvement in reporting individuals who may be classified as goondas, reflecting a collective approach to maintaining public order. -
• Judicial Review - Courts retain the authority to review the legality of externment orders, ensuring that they are not arbitrary or capricious. - [Shiv Prasad Gupta VS State of U. P. ]
• Public Perception - The classification of an individual as a goonda can lead to a negative public perception, affecting their social interactions and opportunities. - [Pavan @ Pavan Singhal VS State of U. P. ]
• Legislative Framework - The Act is part of a broader legislative framework aimed at controlling anti-social activities and ensuring community safety. -
• Need for Reform - There is a growing call for reforming the application of the Act to prevent misuse and ensure that it serves its intended purpose without infringing on individual rights. -

S.4 Permission to return temporarily

The District Magistrate may, by an order permit any person in respect of whom an order has been made under clause (a) of sub-section (3) of Section 3 to enter or return, for a temporary period, into or to the area from which he was directed to remove himself, subject to such conditions as the District Magistrate may specify and may at any time rescind any such permission.

S.5 Extension of period of order

The District Magistrate may, after giving, except where for reasons to be recorded in writing he is satisfied that it is impracticable so to do, to the person concerned an opportunity of making a representation in that behalf, extend from time to time in the interest of the general public the period specified in the order made under Section 3, but the period so extended shall in no case exceed two years in the aggregate.

S.6 Appeal

(1) Any person aggrieved by an order made under Section 3, Section 4 or Section 5 may appeal to the Commissioner within fifteen days from the date of such order.

(2) The appellant or his counsel shall not be entitled to inspect or to be informed of any record which was not disclosed to him at the inquiry, if any, held under Section 3.

(3) The Commissioner may either confirm the order, with or without modification, or set it aside and may, p

S.7 Recognizance for certain purposes

(1) The District Magistrate or the Commissioner may for the purpose of:-

(a) securing the attendance of any person against whom an order is proposed to be made under Section 3, or has been made but its operation has been stayed under Section 6.

(b) securing the due observance of any direction, requirement, prohibition, restriction or condition specified in an order made in respect of any person under Section 3, Section 4, Section 5 or Secti

S.8 Nature of evidence

The District Magistrate or the Commissioner may for the purpose of satisfying himself as to whether the conditions necessary for the making or confirmation of an order under Section 3 or Section 5 exist or not, take into consideration any evidence which he considers to have probative value, and the provisions of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, shall not apply.

S.9 Rescission of order

The District Magistrate or the Commissioner may at any time rescind an order made under Section 3, whether or not such order was confirmed on appeal under Section 6.

S.10 Punishment for contravention of orders under Sections 3 to 6

Whoever contravenes any order made under Section 3, Section 4, Section 5 or Section 6 shall be punishable with rigorous imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years but shall not be less than six months, and shall also be liable to fine.

Legal Commentary on Section 10 of the Uttar Pradesh Control of Goondas Act, 1970

Introduction

The Uttar Pradesh Control of Goondas Act, 1970, was enacted to curb the activities of habitual criminals (goondas) and to ensure public safety. Section 10 specifically addresses the punishment for contravening orders issued under various sections of the Act.

What does Section 10 Say

Section 10 stipulates that any individual who contravenes an order made under Sections 3, 4, 5, or 6 of the Act shall be punishable with rigorous imprisonment for a term that may extend to three years.

Essential Ingredients

• Contravention of Orders: The core element of this section is the violation of orders issued under the specified sections.
• Punishable Offense: The act of contravention is classified as a punishable offense under the law.

Scope of Section

• The section applies to individuals who have been specifically ordered to refrain from certain activities or areas as per the provisions of Sections 3 to 6.
• It serves as a preventive measure aimed at maintaining public order and safety.

Punishment for Section

• The punishment for contravening the orders can include rigorous imprisonment for up to three years.
• Additionally, the court may impose fines or other conditions as deemed appropriate.

Legal Comments

• Contravention - Section 10 penalizes individuals for violating orders under Sections 3 to 6, emphasizing the importance of compliance with preventive measures. -
• Rigorous Imprisonment - The section prescribes rigorous imprisonment as a deterrent against habitual offenders, reflecting the Act's intent to maintain public order. -
• Preventive Nature - The Act is designed to prevent crime by restricting the movements of individuals deemed as goondas, thereby protecting the community. -
• Judicial Discretion - Courts have the discretion to impose probation under the Probation of Offenders Act for first-time offenders, as seen in recent judgments. - [ "Bhajan Singh @ Bhajnu VS State Of Uttarakhand"]
• First Offender Consideration - The judiciary may consider the status of the offender (first-time vs. habitual) when determining the sentence, allowing for rehabilitation rather than punishment. - [ "Bhajan Singh @ Bhajnu VS State Of Uttarakhand"]
• Public Safety - The Act aims to enhance public safety by enabling authorities to take preemptive action against individuals who pose a threat to societal peace. -
• Cognizance of Offense - No magistrate shall take cognizance of an offense under Section 10 without a written report, ensuring procedural safeguards are in place. -
• Misuse Concerns - There are concerns regarding the misuse of the Act, with allegations that it can be used to suppress dissent rather than solely for public safety. -
• Conditions of Release - Courts may impose specific conditions upon release on probation, which must be adhered to by the offender to avoid serving the original sentence. - [ "Bhajan Singh @ Bhajnu VS State Of Uttarakhand"]
• Appeal Process - Individuals convicted under Section 10 have the right to appeal, as demonstrated in various judicial reviews of the Act's application. - [ "Bhajan Singh @ Bhajnu VS State Of Uttarakhand"]
• Role of District Magistrate - The District Magistrate plays a crucial role in enforcing the provisions of the Act, including issuing orders that can lead to contraventions. -
• Legal Framework - The Act operates within a broader legal framework aimed at controlling organized crime and ensuring community safety. -
• Judicial Review - The judiciary has the power to review the application of the Act to prevent arbitrary enforcement and protect individual rights. -
• Public Perception - The effectiveness and fairness of the Act are often debated in public discourse, highlighting the balance between safety and civil liberties. -
• Rehabilitation Focus - Recent judicial trends indicate a shift towards rehabilitation for first-time offenders rather than punitive measures, aligning with modern criminal justice principles. - [ "Bhajan Singh @ Bhajnu VS State Of Uttarakhand"]
• Legislative Intent - The legislative intent behind Section 10 is to deter habitual offenders while providing mechanisms for reform and rehabilitation. -
• Impact on Society - The enforcement of Section 10 has significant implications for societal norms and the legal landscape concerning crime and punishment in Uttar Pradesh. -

S.11 Forcible removal of externed Goonda re-entering, etc., in contravention of order

(1) Where, after an order is made against a person under Section 3, Section 4, Section 5 or Section 6 such person:-

(a) has failed to remove himself from the district or part as directed by the order.

(b) has re-entered the area, from which he was ordered to remove himself during the period of operation of that order, the District Magistrate may cause him to be arrested and removed in police custody to such place outside the area specified

S.12 Cognizance of offence

No Magistrate shall take cognizance of an offence punishable under Section 10, except:-

(a) upon a report in writing of the facts constituting such offence made by a police officer.

(b) upon information received from any person other than a police officer, or upon his own knowledge or suspicion, that such offence has been committed.

S.13 Savings as to orders

No order, made in exercise of any power conferred by or under this Act shall be called in question in any court.

S.14 Protection of action taken under the Act

(1) No suit, prosecution or other legal proceeding shall lie against any person for anything which is in good faith done or intended to be done in pursuance of this Act or of any order made thereunder.

(2) No suit or other legal proceeding shall lie against the State Government for any damage caused or likely to be caused by anything which is in good faith done or intended to be done in pursuance of this Act or of any order made thereunder.

S.15 Power to make rules

(1) The State Government may by notification in the Gazette make rules for carrying out the purposes of this Act.

(2) All rules made under this Act shall, as soon as may after they are made, be laid before each House of the State Legislature, while it is in session, for a total period of not less than fourteen days extending in its one session or more than one successive sessions and shall, unless some later date is appointed, take effect from the date of their publication in the Gazette su

S.16 Repeal of U.P. Ordinance No. 15 of 1970

The U.P. Control of Goondas Ordinance, 1970, is hereby repealed.