# Vinay Kumar Gupta v. State of U.P. & Anr. Opp. Parties

- **Citation:** (2025) 5 ILRA 1039
- **Court:** High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
- **Decided:** 2025-05-12
- **Case number:** Crl. Misc. Application U/S 482 No. 20422 of 2024
- **Bench:** Vinod Diwakar
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/allahabad-high-court/vinay-kumar-gupta-v-state-of-u-p-anr-opp-parties-53286
- **Pages:** 11

## Headnote

Criminal Law - Criminal Procedure Code,
1973 - Sections 107, 108, 109, 110 & 482
- U.P. Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities
(Prevention) Act, 1986 - Sections 2, 2B(1), 3, 12 & 14 - U.P. Gangsters and
1040 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
Anti-Social Activities (Prevention), Rules,
2021 - Rule 5, 5(3)(a), 8(3), 10(1), 16(1),
16(2), 17(2), 20, 20(3), 20(4), 22(2),
26(1), 36 & 64 - Bharatiya Nagarik
Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 - Sections 94,
126, 127, 128, 129 & 193- Application u/s
482
of
Cr.P.C.
-
challenging
the
entire
proceedings under the Gangsters Act - initiated
solely on the basis of a single 'FIR' - alleging
illegal mining and transportation using fake
documents, which purportedly caused public
fear and revenue loss - applicants claimed false
implication and highlighted their impoverished
status, prompting the Court to scrutinize
procedural
lapses,
including
mechanical
approval of the gang chart without proper
verification - The Court directed the SP to
submit
all
materials
justifying
the
Act's
invocation and ordered a financial inquiry by the
SDM, which revealed minimal assets and bank
activity among the accused - Dissatisfied with
the rationale provided by the approving officers,
the Court mandated their virtual appearance
and emphasized the need for training and
compliance with Rule 5(3)(a) of the 2021 Rules
-
A
re-investigation
was
ordered,
and
departmental action was recommended against
negligent officers, leading to the exoneration of
all accused and filing of a closure report - To
prevent future misuse, the Court further
directed consolidation of conflicting checklists
from the Home Department and Directorate of
Prosecution, mandated pre-submission review of
charge
sheets
by
prosecution
officers,
empowered courts to report non-compliance -
accordingly, application is disposed of with
directions to circulate a fresh circular and
compliance
report
to
ensure
uniform
implementation across U.P. (Para - 10, 11, 12,
14, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21)

Application Disposed of. (E-11)

List of Cases cited:

Gorakh Nath Mishra Vs St. of U.P. (Diary No.
2673 of 2023

## Text

5 All. Vinay Kumar Gupta Vs. State of U.P. & Anr.
1039
other provisions of Part-III of the
Constitution. Therefore, religious liberty
under Article 25 is not unfettered and
can be regulated by the State.

31. Though the Muslim Personal Law
(Shariat) Application Act, 1937 declared
that issues among Muslims mentioned in
Section 2 of Act, 1937 shall be decided as
per Muslim Personal Law, but Parliament
has enacted the following laws in the
exercise of its regulatory power for the
welfare of Muslim woman :-

(i) The Dissolution of Muslim
Marriage Act, 1939

(ii)
The
Muslim
Women
(Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act,
1986

(iii)
The
Muslim
Women
(Protection of Rights on Marriage) Act,
2019

32. From the perusal of several
provisions of Muslim law discussed above,
it is also clear that Islam permits more than
one
marriage
only
under
certain
circumstances and with certain conditions,
but this permission is widely misused even
against the mandate of Muslim law as
mentioned in above quoted verses of
Quran. Therefore, this Court is also of the
view that the suggestion made in Smt.
Sarla Mudgal (supra), Lily Thomas
(supra)
and
Jafar
Abbas
Rasoolmohammad
Merchant
(supra)
regarding enactment of Uniform Civil Code
in pursuance of mandate of Article 44 of
the Constitution of India needs to be
considered by the legislature.

33. Coming back to the controversy in
hand, from the perusal of statement of
opposite party no. 2, it is clear that she
admitted that applicant no.1 has contracted
second marriage with her and both are
Muslims, therefore, second marriage is
valid, therefore offence u/s 376 I.P.C. as
well as 495/120-B I.P.C. are not made out
against the applicants.

34. Matter requires consideration.

35. Issue notice to opposite party no. 2
returnable at an early date.

36. List this case in the week
commencing 26.05.2025.

37. Till the next date of listing, no
coercive action shall be taken against the
applicants in the aforesaid case.
----------
(2025) 5 ILRA 1039
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL SIDE
DATED: ALLAHABAD 12.05.2025

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE VINOD DIWAKAR, J.

Crl. Misc. Application U/S 482 No. 20422 of
2024
and
Application U/S 482 No. 32108 of 2024

Vinay Kumar Gupta ...Applicant
Versus
State of U.P. & Anr. ...Opp. Parties

Counsel for the Applicant:
Sri Arvind Kumar Mishra, Sri Devendra
Mishra

Counsel for the Opp. Parties:
G.A.

Criminal Law - Criminal Procedure Code,
1973 - Sections 107, 108, 109, 110 & 482
- U.P. Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities
(Prevention) Act, 1986 - Sections 2, 2B(1), 3, 12 & 14 - U.P. Gangsters and
1040 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
Anti-Social Activities (Prevention), Rules,
2021 - Rule 5, 5(3)(a), 8(3), 10(1), 16(1),
16(2), 17(2), 20, 20(3), 20(4), 22(2),
26(1), 36 & 64 - Bharatiya Nagarik
Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 - Sections 94,
126, 127, 128, 129 & 193- Application u/s
482
of
Cr.P.C.
-
challenging
the
entire
proceedings under the Gangsters Act - initiated
solely on the basis of a single 'FIR' - alleging
illegal mining and transportation using fake
documents, which purportedly caused public
fear and revenue loss - applicants claimed false
implication and highlighted their impoverished
status, prompting the Court to scrutinize
procedural
lapses,
including
mechanical
approval of the gang chart without proper
verification - The Court directed the SP to
submit
all
materials
justifying
the
Act's
invocation and ordered a financial inquiry by the
SDM, which revealed minimal assets and bank
activity among the accused - Dissatisfied with
the rationale provided by the approving officers,
the Court mandated their virtual appearance
and emphasized the need for training and
compliance with Rule 5(3)(a) of the 2021 Rules
-
A
re-investigation
was
ordered,
and
departmental action was recommended against
negligent officers, leading to the exoneration of
all accused and filing of a closure report - To
prevent future misuse, the Court further
directed consolidation of conflicting checklists
from the Home Department and Directorate of
Prosecution, mandated pre-submission review of
charge
sheets
by
prosecution
officers,
empowered courts to report non-compliance -
accordingly, application is disposed of with
directions to circulate a fresh circular and
compliance
report
to
ensure
uniform
implementation across U.P. (Para - 10, 11, 12,
14, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21)

Application Disposed of. (E-11)

List of Cases cited:

Gorakh Nath Mishra Vs St. of U.P. (Diary No.
2673 of 2023
(Delivered by Hon'ble Vinod Diwakar, J.)

1. Heard Shri Arvind Kumar Mishra
and Shri Afzal Ahmad Khan Durrani,
learned counsel for the applicants, learned
Additional Advocate General assisted by
Shri Vibhav Anand Singh, learned A.G.A.
for the State-respondents, in both the
applications, and perused the material on
record.

2. The instant applications have been
preferred
challenging
the
entire
proceedings arising out of Case Crime
No.161 of 2022, under section 2/3 of the
Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti Social
Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 registered
at
Police
Station
Karari,
District
Kaushambi1, pending trial in the Court of
learned Additional Sessions Judge/FTC1st, Kaushambi, as well as cognizance
order dated 24.1.2024 passed by learned
Additional
Sessions
Judge/FTC-1st,
Kaushambi.

3. The applicants' case emerges from
the approval of the gang-chart, and on
perusal it's observed that the gang leader
Ajay Kumar Saroj, son of Jeete resident of
Goraju Police Station Paschim Sarira,
District Kaushambi, along with his coaccused members; (i) Rahul, son of
Chhidda, resident of Ghasiya Ka Pura,
Police Station- Paschim Sarira District-
Kaushambi, (ii) Vinay Kumar Gupta son of
late Govind Prasad, resident of Buksi Ka
Purwa, Police Station- Paschim Sarira,
District Kaushambi, and (iii) Rajaram
Kesharwani son of Chhedilal resident of
Goraju, Police Station- Paschim Sarira,
District Kaushambi, has been operating an
organized gang at district level. The
members of this gang have amassed huge
illegal money by doing illegal mining and
transportation based on fake Ravanas; due
to
the
activities
of
the
gang,
the
government is suffering huge revenue loss.
By doing such acts, the said gang has
created so much fear in the public that
5 All. Vinay Kumar Gupta Vs. State of U.P. & Anr.
1041
people are unable to muster the courage to
complain against them due to their fear.
Earlier, such mining maafias, as per
newspaper reporting, caused the death of
mining officers in road accidents who
attempted to stop illegal mining. Due to
their terror in public, the normal life and
law and order situation causing disruption,
therefore, the criminal act committed by the
said gang is covered under sub-section (1)
of section 2B of the Gangsters Act, 1986.

4. Based on the aforesaid facts, an FIR
was registered and after conclusion of the
investigation, the police report was filed,
against the applicants and after that the
applicants have been summoned vide
impugned summoning order 24.1.2024.

5. Learned counsel for the applicants
submits that the applicants have been
falsely implicated based on a single case.
False
and
fabricated
allegations
of
involvement of the applicants in illegal
mining have been levelled at the behest of
real mining Maafia, who are involved in
illegal mining with the aid and assistance of
local police. It is further submitted that without
taking into confidence- the local police and the
revenue authorities- no such activities to any
stretch of imagination is possible in the current
bureaucratic set-up. It is next submitted that the
alleged gang leader is extremely a poor man
and does not even own a pakka house. The
other co-applicants are living ordinarily life and
have no income from known or unknown
sources- contrary to the allegations made in the
gang chart. The District Magistrate and
Superintendent of Police have approved the
gang chart mechanically without prima-facie
satisfying themselves on the material presented
before them by the Nodal Officer.

6. Per contra, learned A.A.G. invited
the Court's attention to the gang chart and
argued that there are serious allegations of
illegal mining against the applicants.
Further argued that from the bare reading
of the material on record, it's prima-facie
revealed
that
the
provisions
of
the
Gangsters Act have been invoked against
the applicants after arriving at a logical
conclusion of involvement of the accused
in the illegal mining by the two senior most
officers of the district.

7. In the given circumstances, this Court
vide order dated 3.7.2024 directed; (i) S.P.,
Kaushambi to file entire material presented by
the Nodal Officer before him and the District
Magistrate, Kaushambi, to justify invoking of
provisions of Gangsters Act based on a single
case, (ii) the S.P., Kaushambi shall also
provide a list of cases from all police stations-
falls under his jurisdiction in which the
provisions of Gangsters Act have been
invoked based on a single case, and (iii) list of
such accused who are facing criminal charges-
FIRs- in more than five cases from all the
police stations of the District Kaushambi,
along with their complete dossier or any other
relevant information, deemed necessary by
S.P. in align with the object of this order.

8. The Sub Divisional Magistrate,
Manjhanpur was directed to file a report on
the financial status, containing property
details (ancestral and self-acquired), bank
account statements of last three years, and
the property possessed by all accused since
2017, namely the gang leader Ajay Kumar
Saroj, co-accused persons Rahul, Vinay
Kumar Gupta, and Raja Ram Kesharwani,
or any other information supporting the
allegations made in the gang-chart after
taking
approval
from
the
District
Magistrate.

9. In compliance thereof, the S.D.M.,
Manjhanpur, by way of an affidavit dated
1042 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
25.7.2024, has apprised the Court that an
inquiry was conducted in terms of the order
passed by this Court, and during the
inquiry, it's revealed that the gang leader
Ajay Kumar Saroj resides in village
Bakarganj,
Majra
Goraju,
District
Kaushambi and has no movable and
immovable property in his name and works
as a labourer. Likewise, co-accused Rahul
is landless, has no bank account and works
as a labourer in Pune, Maharashtra. The
applicant, Vinay Kumar Gupta, resides
with his brothers in a house jointly owned
by the brothers and owns a bike. The
accused, Raja Ram Kesharwani, owns two
tractors and one bike. The account
statements of all the accused, by and large,
show the bare minimum transactions in
contrast to the allegations made in the
gang-chart.

10. Based on the foregoing facts, to
facilitate fair adjudication A.C.S. (Home),
the then District Magistrate and S.P.
Kaushambi, who had given approval for the
initiation
of
the
proceedings
under
Gangsters Act qua applicants were directed
to
appear
virtually
through
video
conferencing before this Court.

11. The then District Magistrate,
Kaushambi and the then Superintendent of
Police,
Kaushambi,
submitted
their
explanations regarding their approval for
invoking the provisions of Uttar Pradesh
Gangsters and Anti Social Activities
(Prevention),
Act,
1986
against
the
applicants. However, the Court was not
satisfied with the officers' approach and
reasoning based on the contents of the
gang-chart. Whereas the A.C.S. (Home),
apprised the Court that, after perusal of the
orders passed by this Court and hearing the
officers a comprehensive training schedule
needs to be scheduled to sensitize the
officers about the legal and procedural
requirements
mandated
under
the
Gangsters Act, 1986 and Rules framed
thereunder in the year 2021.

11.1 For sure, this initiative by
the Home Department shall be a significant
step towards improving the work culture by
enhancing the professional skills of officers
posted at the district level. The State
Government's
initiative
will
foster
continuous engagement of officers with the
general public.

11.2 The Court emphasized that
District Magistrates and Commissioners of
Police/ S.S.Ps./ S.Ps. in districts require
continuous
training
to
enhance
their
professional skills. It's observed that these
officers rely heavily on reports prepared by
the SHO and SI, which has a cascading
effect on individuals and the administration
of the rule of law. A more just, equitable,
and cautious approach is necessary when
applying stringent legal provisions to
citizens. A reliance has been placed upon
Rule 5(3)(a) of the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters
and Anti Social Activities (Prevention),
Rules, 20212, in which a joint meeting of
the district's head, both civil administration
and police, is required for approval of gang
chart with reasoned findings on the
material placed by the Nodal Officer,
besides other provisions and Rules framed
thereunder the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and
Anti Social Activities (Prevention), Act,
19863.

12.
In
light
of
the
foregoing
discussions, the present case was directed
to be re-investigated by a competent
officer, considering the affidavit filed by
the S.D.M., Manjhanpur and other relevant
materials that emerged during the hearing.
It was also directed to conduct an inquiry
by an officer of Home Department not
5 All. Vinay Kumar Gupta Vs. State of U.P. & Anr.
1043
below the rank of Deputy Secretary in
conducting a flawed investigation by the
S.H.O. P.S. Karari, District Kaushambi and
the then Nodal Officer.

13. In compliance thereof, the Joint
Secretary (Home) submitted an inquiry
report dated 10.12.2024 inter-alia holding
that the S.H.O. was found to be negligent
and a departmental inquiry was proposed to
be held at district level qua him and the
then Additional Superintendent of Police,
Kaushambi-
the
Nodal
Officer-
was
directed to remain vigilant and sensible
while performing official duty.

14. The Additional Superintendent of
Police/ Nodal Officer, Kaushambi, vide
compliance affidavit dated 11.12.2024
informed the Court that in re-investigation
all
the
accused
persons
have
been
exonerated by police from all the charges
and a closure report has been filed before
the Court on 9.12.2024 qua all accused and
recorded a finding in S.C.D. Parcha No.14.
Therefore, the grievances raised by the
applicants stands resolved.

15. This Court repeatedly encounters
with cases wherein non-application of mind
by the District Magistrates/Commissioners
of
Police/Senior
Superintendents
of
Police/Superintendents of Police has been
observed that the approvals are granted
mechanically in a routine manner in
contravention of the provisions of the Act,
1968 and Rules, 2021.

16. During the hearing of this case,
numerous judgments were cited by both the
applicants and the State. Upon perusal of
these judgments in light of the Rules, 2021,
this Court observed that the police have
repeatedly failed to comply with them. This
non-compliance has resulted, on one hand,
in a denial of justice to the victim, and on
the other, has provided the police with a
tool
to
perpetrate
atrocities
against
resourceless, innocent, and vulnerable
individuals for ulterior motives. More often
than not, such misuse ends up benefiting
the actual gangsters, who are shielded
rather than brought to justice. Therefore,
the Home Department, in consultation with
the Director General of Police, was directed
to prepare a check list and training
schedule for all District Magistrates and
Commissioners
of
Police/Senior
Superintendents of Police/Superintendents
of Police to sensitize the officers to ensure
compliance.

17. Learned A.A.G. for the Staterespondents handed over a copy of the
office
memorandum/circular
dated
02.12.2024, issued by Secretary (Home),
and the same has been taken on record. On
perusal of the office memorandum dated
02.12.2024
reveals
that
the
Home
department has formulated guidelines in
compliance with the directions issued by
the Supreme Court in Gorakh Nath Mishra
v. State of U.P. (Diary No. 2673 of 2023).
The guidelines are outlined herein:

"(1) The provisions of the Act
shall be invoked only when a crime has
been
committed
by
a
gang
either
individually
or
collectively
with
the
intention of disturbing public order or to
obtain any undue, worldly, economic,
material, monetary, or other gain for
themselves or others, through violence,
threat of violence, display, intimidation,
persecution, or by any other means.

(2) The gang chart shall be
prepared
by
the
Station
House
Officer/Officer-in-Charge of the police
station by writing the details of the gang's
criminal activities in Form No. 3 of the
1044 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
Rules, 2021 and shall be enclosed with the
gang chart.

(3) A certified copy of the gang
register maintained at the police station
shall also be enclosed with the gang chart.
Additionally, criminal details collected
through DCRB and CCTNS/ICJS shall also
be attached.

(4) The gang chart must clearly
specify under which sub-clause of clause
(b) of Section 2 of the Gangsters Act the
crimes described in the chart fall.

(5) The current status of all cases
mentioned in the gang chart must be clearly
stated.

(6) All information in the gang
chart must be correctly and accurately
recorded, and no unverified or false
information should be included.

(7) Full compliance with the
provisions of Rule 5 of the Rules, 2021
must be ensured. Cases for which action
has already been taken under the Act
against
the
accused
should
not
be
mentioned in the gang chart. However, a
list of such cases shall be attached with the
gang chart in the format prescribed under
Rule 5.

(8) Upon receipt of the file at the
office of the Police Commissioner/District
Magistrate, a thorough re-examination of
all facts shall be conducted and, as per Rule
5(3)(a) of the Rules, 2021, the Police
Commissioner/District
Magistrate
shall
approve the gang chart only after being
satisfied in a joint meeting with the Senior
Superintendent of Police/Superintendent of
Police.

(9)
In
addition
to
strict
compliance with the above-mentioned
government orders regarding preparation,
approval, legal scrutiny, and other relevant
actions of the gang chart, a register shall be
maintained to record the resolutions of joint
meetings of the District Magistrate/Police
Commissioner/Senior Superintendent of
Police/Superintendent of Police under Rule
5(3)(a) of the Rules, 2021. Furthermore, the
Police
Commissioner/Senior
Superintendent of Police/Superintendent of
Police and District Magistrate as well as the
Nodal Officer shall ensure that they
mention the date below their signatures
while signing the gang chart.

(10) The satisfaction of the
competent authorities must reflect that they
have applied their mind not only to the
gang chart but also to the documents/forms
attached to it.

(11) The date of filing of the
charge sheet under the original case must
be mentioned in Column 6 of the gang
chart, except in cases covered under Rule
22(2) of the Rules, 2021 where the
Gangsters Act may be applied during
investigation. According to Rule 8(3) of the
Rules, 2021, the latest status of the cases
and
convictions
or
relevant
court
proceedings against the gang as shown in
the gang chart must be clearly mentioned.
Therefore, strict compliance with this rule
must be ensured by updating the status of
each case as of the date of approval of the
gang chart.

(12) As per Rule 10(1), the
recovery memo and a certified copy of the
charge sheet must be attached with the
gang chart.

(13) Rule 16(1) of the Rules,
2021 lays down the rules related to the
forwarding of the gang chart by the
Additional
Superintendent
of
Police.
Hence, the Additional Superintendent of
Police must clearly record their satisfaction
regarding the gang chart as per the
prescribed rule.

(14) Under Rule 16(2) of the
Rules, 2021, the District Police Officer,
i.e.,
the
Senior
Superintendent
of
Police/Superintendent of Police, shall, after
5 All. Vinay Kumar Gupta Vs. State of U.P. & Anr.
1045
studying the recommendation of the
Additional Superintendent of Police under
Rule 16(1), record their satisfaction and
forward the gang chart to the Police
Commissioner or District Magistrate for
approval.

(15) As per Rule 17(2) of the
Rules, 2021, use of pre-printed rubber
stamps for signing the gang chart is
prohibited. Accordingly, approval on the
gang chart shall be recorded only after
proper application of an independent mind
by the competent authority, and pre-printed
rubber stamps shall not be used.

(16) Under Rule 20(3) of the
Rules, 2021, after the investigation related
to the gangster is complete but before
submitting the charge sheet or final report
to the court, the investigation-related
documents must be forwarded to the
concerned prosecutor by the Additional
Superintendent of Police. Therefore, it must
be ensured that all investigation records
related to the gangster are examined by the
concerned prosecution officer.

(17) If the prosecution officer
points out any illegality or irregularity in
the investigation or in the documents
collected during the investigation, the same
must
be
rectified.
Only
after
the
prosecution
officer
confirms
that
no
illegality or irregularity remains, the
Additional Superintendent of Police shall
forward the documents to the Senior
Superintendent of Police or Superintendent
of Police for approval under Rule 20(4) of
the Rules, 2021.

(18) Under Rule 26(1) of the
Rules,
2021,
whenever
the
abovementioned charge sheet is sent before the
Police
Commissioner/
Senior
Superintendent of Police/ Superintendent of
Police for necessary approval under Rule
20, a thorough re-examination of all
documents must compulsorily be done by
them.

(19) Under Rule 36 of the Rules,
2021, a proper investigation must be
conducted regarding the movable and
immovable properties of the gangster and
their sources of acquisition. If evidence
regarding illegal occupation of land by the
gangster is to be collected, then the
investigating officer must collect revenue
records and evidence from the revenue
authority.

(20) Under Section 14 of the Act,
a
report
with
complete
details
and
documentary evidence of the property for
attachment must mandatorily be submitted
before the Police Commissioner/District
Magistrate. A copy of the order of
attachment of gangster's property passed
by
the
Police
Commissioner/District
Magistrate must also be included in the
investigation.

(21) The case registered in a
police station related to the gangster shall
not be investigated by that same station. If
the
SHO/Officer-in-Charge
of
the
registering station is posted or transferred
to the investigating station, they must
inform the nodal officer and refrain from
conducting the investigation themselves, as
it would put them in a position of both
complainant and investigator.

(22) Under Rule 64 of the Uttar
Pradesh
Gangsters
and
Anti-Social
Activities
(Prevention)
Rules,
2021,
district-level, divisional-level, and statelevel committees have been constituted for
the supervision, review, and management
of proceedings under the Gangsters Act.
The quarterly meetings of the district-level
committee
chaired
by
the
Police
Commissioner/District Magistrate must be
ensured.
Similarly,
meetings
of
the
divisional-level committee chaired by the
Divisional
Commissioner
must
1046 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
compulsorily be convened every six
months.

(23) It must be ensured that no
gangster
receives
any
benefits
from
government services, businesses, leases, or
government
schemes
under
any
circumstances. Measures like attachment of
property, appointment of administrator,
confiscation, suspension or cancellation of
licenses, and recovery should be employed
as required.

(24) The investigation under this
Act should be completed within six
months. If not possible, an extension of a
maximum of 3 months at a time may be
granted after approval by the district police
officer. No further extension shall be
permitted beyond this.

(25) The investigating officer
must
mention
the
name,
address
(permanent and temporary), phone number,
and relevant details of the accused and
witnesses in the charge sheet.

(26) The district police officer
must conduct a thorough review of all facts
and
evidence
collected
during
the
investigation before granting approval to
send the charge sheet/final report to the
concerned court.

(27) If the investigating officer
deems it appropriate, police custody
remand of the gangster must be taken
within the first 60 days.

(28) At the time of the gangster's
initial remand and each subsequent remand,
the investigating officer must personally
appear before the special court with the
complete case diary.

(29) The report with full details
of the property and documentary evidence
for attachment under Section 14 of the Act
must
mandatorily
be
sent
by
the
investigating
officer
to
the
Police
Commissioner/District Magistrate.

(30) If an order for attachment of
the gangster's property has been passed by
the
Police
Commissioner/District
Magistrate, a copy of that order must also
be included in the investigation.

(31) Proceedings under Section
14
and
approval
of
the
gang
chart/registration of the FIR must be
presented
before
the
district-level
supervisory committee.

(32) For effective conviction,
compliance with the following provisions is
essential:

(i) If actions under Sections 107,
108, 109, 110 of the Cr.P.C. (now Sections
126, 127, 128, 129 of the Bharatiya
Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023), the
National Security Act, 1980, the Prevention
of Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and
Psychotropic Substances Act, 1970, or the
Uttar Pradesh Goonda Act, 1970 have been
taken against the accused mentioned in the
gang chart, such details must be clearly
mentioned in the gang chart and certified
copies of such orders must be attached.

(ii) Full compliance with Section
12 of the Act must be ensured, which
provides that a trial under this Act shall
take precedence over any other case against
the accused pending before any other court.
The other case shall remain suspended until
the trial under this Act is concluded. Hence,
all prosecutors must ensure that an
application to suspend the trial of such
other cases is filed.

(iii) While investigating under
this Act, the investigating officer must
collect evidence that clearly shows that the
gangster engages in anti-social activities
described under the Act, with the intent to
disturb public order or to gain any undue
temporal, economic, material, or other
benefit for themselves or others, either
alone or collectively, through violence,
5 All. Vinay Kumar Gupta Vs. State of U.P. & Anr.
1047
threat of violence or display, intimidation,
persecution, or by other means.

(33)
Mere
attachment
under
Section 14 is not sufficient; confiscation of
the attached property in favour of the state
by the Gangster Special Court is also
necessary. Therefore, regular and intensive
review of the same must be done at the
district and divisional levels.

(34) Notably, a checklist was sent
with Office Memorandum No. 4080/6-Pu09-2024-1842633 dated 24.09.2024. Based
on letter No. 5-1-Writ-44-2024/5302/2024
dated 29.11.2024 from the Additional
Director General of Police (Prosecution),
U.P., Lucknow, a new checklist has been
prepared
after
due
consideration,
incorporating
the
checklist
points
mentioned therein as Enclosure-1. Before
approval of the gang chart and registration
of FIR, all points of the checklist attached
as Enclosure-1 must be fulfilled. These
checklist points are illustrative and not
exhaustive. Therefore, stakeholders are
expected to prepare a detailed and effective
checklist in this regard."

18. The letter dated 29.11.2024, issued
by the Office of the Director (Prosecution),
Uttar Pradesh, indicates that two checklists
have been prepared for police officers- one
by the Home Department and the other by
the Directorate of Prosecution. These
checklists have been forwarded to the
Director General of Police, Additional
Director General of Police (Prosecution),
all Commissioners of Police, District
Magistrates, Senior Superintendents of
Police/Superintendents of Police in Uttar
Pradesh, and the relevant section of the
Home Department for strict compliance.

19. The existence of two separate
checklists may lead to confusion among
Investigating Officers and Prosecution
Officers at the district level. Therefore,
based on the foregoing discussions, the
Additional Chief Secretary (Home) is
hereby directed;

(i) To ensure that a single check
list be prepared based on the two check
lists - discussed aforesaid - prepared by the
Department of Home and the Directorate
(Prosecution), herein within 30 days of this
order, and shall further ensure strict
adherence by the investigating officer with
the check list during investigation.

(ii) The Director General of
Police, in consultation with the Department
of
Home
shall
jointly
prepare
a
compendium containing: (a) guidelines
formulated by the Home Department in
compliance of Gorakh Nath Mishra's case
(supra),
(b)
circular
bearing
no.
DG/Circular
No.-06/2018
dated
19.02.2018, issued by the Director General
of Police, (c) a single check list, and (d) the
other instructions issued under the authority
of this order.

(iii) The Director General of
Police, Uttar Pradesh shall ensure the strict
implementation of the circular bearing no.
DG/Circular
No.-06/2018
dated
19.02.2018, issued by the Director General
of Police, whereby it has been made
mandatory to every Investigating Officer
that upon completion of investigation, prior
to submission of charge-sheet/final report,
the Investigating Officer must forward the
draft charge sheet along with case diary to
the Prosecution Officer through the Circle
Officer. The Prosecution Officer shall
review the case diary and evaluate the
evidence collected during the investigation.
If any shortcomings or inconsistencies are
found, they shall be indicated, and further
investigation shall be directed to address
those issues. The case diary shall be
returned to the Investigating Officer via the
1048 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
same
channel
after
the
Prosecution
Officer's review, and only thereafter, the
charge sheet or final report shall be
submitted to the Court.

(iv)
The
Director
General
(Prosecution) shall issue general guidelines
to all the Prosecution Officers to review the
charge sheet along with the case diary in a
time-bound manner. The number of days to
complete the said exercise shall be decided
by the Department of Prosecution.

(v) The charge sheet shall be filed
along with a duly paginated Index
containing; (a) serial number, (b) date-wise
brief description of the investigation in
seriatim- CD wise details, (c) details of
document collected during investigation,
(d) brief description of steps taken by
Investigating Officer, (e) details of Section
94 B.N.S.S., 2023 notice, issued to " any
person" to produce document and other
thing, and (f) or any other details as deem
fit by the Investigating Officer.

(vi) Every Investigating Officer
upon completion of investigation, prior to
submission of charge-sheet/final report,
must make an endorsement in the case
diary a day prior or on the date of
submission of the charge sheet to the Court
that the guidelines issued in compliance of
Gorakh Nath Mishra's case (supra), the
steps mentioned in the check list and the
mandate
of
circular
bearing
no.
DG/Circular
No.-06/2018
dated
19.02.2018, issued by the Director General
of Police, has been complied with in letter
and spirit. The copy of the Case Diary,
containing the aforesaid details, shall be
forwarded to the Court following the report
under Section 193 BNSS, 2023.

(vii) If preceding Direction No.
(v), has not been complied with by the
Investigating Officer, the learned Special
Judge, Chief Judicial Magistrate, or the
learned Magistrate, as the case may be,
shall immediately communicate the noncompliance to the Commissioner of
Police or the Senior Superintendent of
Police/Superintendent
of
Police
and
direct
that
appropriate
departmental
action
be
initiated
against
the
Investigating Officer. It is equally the
duty of the Court to ensure that the orders
passed by the Constitutional Courts are
strictly implemented by the authorities,
upholding the rule of law in both letter
and spirit.

(viii)
A
fresh
Office
Memorandum/Circular
should
be
accordingly
issued
by
the
Home
Department, instructing Director General
of
Police
and
the
Directorate
(Prosecution)
to
issue
a
fresh
Circular/Office Memorandum to their
respective officers based on the foregoing
directions.

(ix) The A.C.S. (Home) shall
submit a compliance report through
Registrar (Compliance) within 45 days
from the date of receipt of a copy of this
order.

20. The Registrar (Compliance) is
hereby directed to transmit a copy of this
order forthwith to the Additional Chief
Secretary (Home), the Director General
of Police, and the Director General
(Prosecution) for effective compliance.

21. A copy of this order shall also be
forwarded to all the learned District
Judges of Uttar Pradesh through the
Registrar General of this Court, with a
direction to circulate the judgment among
all Judicial Officers to ensure compliance
with direction no.(vii).

22. With the aforesaid observations
and directions, the instant applications are
hereby
disposed
of.
5 All. Birender Singh Vs. State of U.P. & Anr.
1049
----------
(2025) 5 ILRA 1049
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL SIDE
DATED: ALLAHABAD 12.05.2025

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE VINOD DIWAKAR, J.

Crl. Misc. Application U/S 482 No. 22859 of
2024
And
Application U/S 482 No. 18870 of 2024
And
Application U/S 482 No. 29462 of 2024

Birender Singh ...Applicant
Versus
State of U.P. & Anr. ...Opp. Parties

Counsel for the Applicant:
Sri Pankaj Sharma, Sri Pradeep Kumar

Counsel for the Opp. Parties:
Sri Fuzail Ahmad Ansari, G.A.

Criminal Law - Criminal Procedure Code,
1973 - Sections 482, 451, 457, 458 & 459
- United Provinces Excise Act, 1910 -
Sections 60, 63, 72 & 73 - U.P. Motor
Vehicle Taxation Act, 1997 - Sections 22,2
& 158 - U.P. Motor Taxation Rules, 1998 -
Rule 9(a), 19-A, - UP Motor Vehicles Rules,
1998 - Rules 203, 203-A - UP Police Act. -
Section 23 & 29 - U.P. Cow Slaughter Act,
1945 - Section - 5-A(7) - U.P. Minor
Mineral Concession Rules, 2021 - Rule
72(6)- Application u/s 482 of Cr.P.C. - FIR
- registered on a complaint of an Excise
Inspector - raid & seizure - of illicit liquor, cash,
and a vehicle under the U.P. Excise Act - owner
of vehicle moved an application for release -
rejected, due to the pending trial - Revision
Petition - rejected - hence present application -
court finds that, this incident highlights a
broader systemic issue in U.P., where over
1,13,000 vehicles remain impounded due to
inconsistent judicial practices, lack of centralized
tracking, and bureaucratic delays - These
inefficiencies not only burden courts and
departments but also risk criminal misuse and
economic loss - To address this, the Court
initiated a comprehensive reform process,
directing
the
formation
of
a
high-level
Coordination Committee to develop structured
guidelines for timely disposal of seized vehicles -
Recommendations include creating a centralized
digital
dashboard
linked
with
CCTNS,
establishing district-level vehicle yards with QR
tracking, prioritizing auctions of unclaimed
vehicles, and enforcing accountability among
officials - The Court emphasized that vehicles,
as national assets, must not be allowed to
deteriorate due to procedural inertia and called
for a pragmatic, development-oriented judicial
approach that balances statutory compliance
with economic utility and property rights -
application disposed of with direction to the
Registrar (Compliance) to transmit this to the
Chief Secretary, Govt. of UP for its effective
compliance within a period of Six months. (Para
28, 30, 32, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45)

Application Disposed of. (E-11)

List of Cases cited:

1. Prem Swamy Vs St. of U.P. - Reported in
1997 Allahabad Criminal Cases (Suppl.) 99

2. Dhirendra Singh Thapa Vs St. of U.P. & ors.-
Criminal Revision No.1926 of 2016

3. Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai Vs St. of Guj. -
(2002) 10 SCC 283,
(Delivered by Hon'ble Vinod Diwakar, J.)

1. Heard learned counsel for the
applicants, learned Additional Advocate
General assisted by learned A.G.A. for the
State-respondents, and perused the record.

2. In the present case, an FIR was
registered by the police on the complaint of
Excise Inspector. Following the registration
of the FIR, a huge quantity of illicit liquor
and Rs.14,03,550/- was recovered, and also
a Mahindra Pick UP vehicle, bearing
Registration
No. UP-16-JT-5779,
was