RAJ KUMAR SINGH Vs. STATE OF U. P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Gopal Krishna Pandey, Advocate, holding brief of Sri Pradeep Singh Sengar, learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.

(2.) This application under Sec. 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed to quash the impugned charge-sheet No. 32 of 2012 dtd. 20/4/2013 and summoning/cognizance order dtd. 30/5/2013 as well as entire proceedings of G.T. No. 13 of 2013 (State v. Sunil and others), arising out of Case Crime No. 196 of 2012, under Sec. 2/3(1) of U.P. Gangster and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, Police Station Bansdih Road, District Ballia.

(3.) Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant was implicated in the present offence under Sec. 2/3(1) of U.P. Gangster and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 on the basis of two base cases; (i) Case Crime No. 476 of 2011, under Ss. 393/307 IPC and (ii) Case Crime No. 47 of 2012, under Sec. 392 IPC. He has submitted that the records of both the cases aforesaid have got burnt due to fire in the judgeship of Ballia. On 21/12/2023, this Court directed the District Judge to get the records of the aforesaid cases reconstruct but as per report dtd. 6/3/2024 of District Judge, Ballia, no report has been received regarding the notice served on the prosecution/informant in both the cases regarding reconstruction of file. On the basis of the aforesaid facts, he has submitted that whether implication of the applicant in two bases cases was correct or not could not be ascertained. Prosecution has not made any effort for re-trial of the aforesaid cases also. It has further been submitted that perusal of the gang chart in the present case shows that it is in gross violation of Rules 5(3)(1). Latest status of both the base cases were not mentioned in the gang chart as per Rule 8(3). There is further violation of Rule 16 and 17 in the present case since procedure of forwarding of gang chart and application of independent mind is not apparent from the gang chart at the time of its approval. The Superintendent of Police has simply mentioned one word 'approved' and the resolution of the Commissioner of Police/District Magistrate is clearly missing in the gang chart.