Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2021
  6. /
  7. January

Abhishek Rastogi @ Sonu Rastogi And Another vs State Of U P And Others

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|21 December, 2021
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. - 52
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 12099 of 2021 Petitioner :- Abhishek Rastogi @ Sonu Rastogi And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Hanuman Prasad Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- G.A
Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Birla,J. Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned A.G.A.
Present writ petition has been preferred for quashing the FIR dated 13.11.2021 registered as Case Crime No.899 of 2021, under Sections 3(1) of U.P. Gangster and Antisocial Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, P.S. Farrukhabad Kotwali, District- Farrukhabad and for a direction to the respondents not to arrest the petitioners in pursuance of the aforesaid FIR.
Learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently contended that only on the basis of solitary case, the proceeding under Section 3(1) of U.P. Gangster Act has been drawn, which is liable to be set aside.
As has been propounded by Division Bench in Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 4622 of 2019 (Somvir Vs. State of U.P. and 2 others) as well as in many judgments by this Court that even a single case, if fulfills the category of offences given under Section 2(b) (i) to (xv) of Act and is being committed by gang defined under Section 2 (b) or gangster defined under Section 2 (c) of the Act may be basis for registration of case crime number for offence punishable under Section 2/3 of Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986. Therefore, the contention of petitioner that based on solitary case, the imposition of Section 2/3 of U.P. Gangster Act is not leviable, would have no bearing.
In view of the aforesaid dictum, even on the basis of solitary case, the provisions of Uttar Pradesh Gangster and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act 1986 can be imposed.
In the facts and circumstances of the case, no case has been made out for interference with the impugned first information report.
Therefore, the writ petition is dismissed leaving it open for the petitioners to apply before the competent court for anticipatory bail/ bail as permissible under law and in accordance with law.
Order Date :- 21.12.2021 A.Kr.
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Abhishek Rastogi @ Sonu Rastogi And Another vs State Of U P And Others

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
21 December, 2021
Judges
  • Vivek Kumar Birla
Advocates
  • Hanuman Prasad Mishra