Supreme Court slams UP Police for Gangsters Act case against SHUATS Director

The Supreme Court on Friday quashed the criminal proceedings under the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act against Vinod Bihari Lal, the Director of Sam Higginbottom University of Agriculture Technology and Science (SHUATS) after finding that the FIR and chargesheet were based on a gang chart rubber-stamped by authorities without any independent application of mind. [Vinod Bihari Lal vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr.].A bench of Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra noted that the manner in which police and district administration sanctioned the gang chart amounted to placing liberty at the mercy of rubber-stamp bureaucracy. The judges held that there was no indication of any joint meeting or deliberation as required under Rule 5(3)(a) of the 2021 Rules framed under the Act. “The competent authority forwarded and approved the gang-chart without verifying whether it had been prepared in accordance with the Rules of 2021. Resultantly, the registration of the subject FIR is in complete violation of the procedural safeguards. We are at pains to observe that authorities, entrusted with the solemn duty of safeguarding life and liberty treat it with such casual indifference, truly a case of the fox guarding the henhouse,” the bench said..The case arose from an FIR registered at Naini Police Station, Allahabad, alleging that Lal and one David Dutta ran an organised gang involved in economic offences. The gang chart was approved the same day the FIR was registered. Chargesheets in five earlier FIRs were used as the basis for initiating proceedings under the Gangsters Act. Challenging the registration of the gangster case, Lal filed two separate petitions before the Allahabad High Court under Section 482 CrPC—one to quash the proceedings and another to quash non-bailable warrants issued against him. On April 19, 2023, the High Court dismissed both petitions, holding that violence or disturbance of public order was not essential under the Gangsters Act and that the gang-chart reflected proper application of mind. It also ruled that the pendency of interim reliefs in base FIRs did not nullify the allegations. Aggrieved by this, Lal approached the Supreme Court.The top court found that four out of the five FIRs used as the basis for initiating proceedings under the Gangsters Act have either been quashed, stayed or were filed against other accused who were not included in the Gangsters Act case. In at least one, the date of the alleged incident was missing. Another case had already been quashed by the Supreme Court. The Court concluded that there was no indication that the alleged acts were done to disturb public order or obtain undue material advantage, both of which are required under the Act..Criticising the investigation and prosecution process as a whole, the Court said there was nothing in the record to show that any of the required statutory procedures were followed.“Upon perusal of the material on record, more particularly the gang-chart, it is abundantly clear that the said gang-chart was approved by the competent authority merely by affixing his signature on a pre-printed gang-chart, an act that reflects nothing short of a complete non-application of mind and constitutes a violation of Rules 16 and 17 of the Rules of 2021 respectively,” the Court said..It also criticised the investigating officer for stating in the chargesheet that offences were “proved” without conducting any meaningful probe or attaching corroborative documents.“We strongly disapprove of this practice and cast it into the cold storage wherein the investigating authority proclaims an offence to be ‘proved’. We would like to remind that the role of investigating agencies is strictly circumscribed to conducting an impartial investigation into the alleged crime; the guilt or the innocence of the accused is for the trial court to determine,” the bench held. .Continuing such proceedings would amount to harassment and abuse of law, the Court said while holding that the case fell squarely within the Bhajan Lal guidelines for quashing of criminal proceedings.The Court also directed State authorities to strictly comply with the 29-point checklist and guidelines issued by the Uttar Pradesh government in December 2024 for invoking the Gangsters Act. The Supreme Court had earlier asked the State to frame such guidelines to prevent misuse..Hence, it set aside the High Court order, allowed Lal’s appeal and quashed all proceedings arising from the Gangster's Act. It clarified that its observations applied only to the Gangsters case and would have no bearing on the pending proceedings in the underlying FIRs..Lal was represented by Senior Advocate Siddhartha Dave along with advocates Pallavi Sharma and Jemtiben AO. .The respondents were represented by Senior Advocate Garima Prashad along with advocates Adarsh Upadhyay, Amit Singh, Aman Pathak, Pallavi Kumari and Shashank Pachauri..[Read Judgment]