SUSHIL KUMAR YADAV Vs. ADDITIONAL DISTRICT MAGISTRATE ANDORS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WE have heard Sri D. S. Mishra, learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned A. G. A.

(2.) A notice under Section 3 (1) of the U. P. Control of Goondas Act has been issued against petitioner which has been challenged by means of this writ petition and the submission of learned Counsel for the petitioner is that the notice has been issued on stale grounds. It has been pointed out that earlier also, a notice had been issued to the petitioner on 16-7-1992 Annexure-3 to the writ petition on the basis of 19 cases of the year 1981 to 1992. The said notice was discharged by order dated 10-2-1995 vide Annexure- 4 to the writ petition. It is noted that present notice Annexure-1 to the writ petition has been issued on 19th March, 2001, based on 16 cases, the last one being Case Crime No. 531 of 1997 under Section 22 of NDPS Act Police Station Atarsuiya, District Allahabad. In this subsequent notice, too, a number of those earlier cases have been included in respect of which notice was issued on 16-7-1992 and the said notice was discharged on 10-2-1995. Learned Counsel for the petitioner relied on a decision of Division Bench in the case of Baldeo Singh v. State of U. P. 1978 (15) 345 that no act falling within the purview of the Control of Goondas Act was done by the petitioner as per own case of the prosecution after 1997. Thus there is no proximity between the notice issued and the offence complained against the petitioner in the present notice issued on 19-3-2001.