Uttar Pradesh Gangsters Act can be invoked even in case of single FIR or chargesheet: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court on Tuesday held that an accused can be prosecuted under the the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 even if only a single first information report (FIR) or chargesheet is filed [Shraddha Gupta v. State of Uttar Pradesh]..A Bench of Justices MR Shah and BV Nagarathna held that any person acting singularly or collectively may be termed as a member of a gang indulging in any anti-social activity as per Section 2(b) of the Gangsters Act. The judgment stated,"...so far as the Gangsters Act, 1986 is concerned, there can be prosecution against a person even in case of a single offence/FIR/charge sheet for any of the anti-social activities mentioned in Section 2(b) of the Act provided such an anti-social activity is by violence, or threat or show of violence, or intimidation, or coercion or otherwise with the object of disturbing public order or of gaining any undue temporal, pecuniary, material or other advantage for himself or any other person.".The appellant before the Supreme Court, who was the original complainant in the case, had alleged that the accused rammed into her sister's vehicle, ultimately resulting in her death.Consequently, an FIR was registered against eight accused-persons, including ex-Bhartiya Janata Party (BJP) Member of Legislative Assembly Yogender Sagar, under Sections 147 (punishment for rioting), 304 (punishment for culpable homicide not amounting to murder), 504 (intentional insult with intent to provoke breach of the peace), 323 (punishment for voluntarily causing hurt), 506 (punishment for criminal intimidation), 120B (punishment for criminal conspiracy) of the Indian Penal Code, and under Section 2 (definition of gang and gangster) and 3 (penalty) of the Gangsters Act. .After the police investigation, the appellant, her husband and one Kamlesh Sharma were also named in the FIR and a supplementary chargesheet that was filed. They were also charged under the UP Gangsters Act. The appellant them approached the High Court for quashing of the FIRs and orders that granted permission to prosecute her under the Gangsters Act. Before the High Court, the appellant had argued that she has been falsely implicated in this case and that she was not even named in the first FIR. She claimed that she was neither a gang leader or a member of any gang, as she is only a household lady. Therefore, she could not be charged under the Gangsters Act solely on the basis of a single FIR/chargesheet against her, it was submitted..The High Court rejected these contentions and dismissed the petition, resulting in the present appeal before the apex court..After going through provisions of the Gangsters Act, the Court noted,"Even a single crime committed by a ‘Gang’ is sufficient to implant Gangsters Act on such members of the ‘Gang’. The definition clause does not engulf plurality of offence before the Gangsters Act is invoked.".The Court noted that in the instant case, the main accused was a gang leader and the mastermind of a criminal conspiracy which involved other co-accused including the appellant, to murder the complainant's sister for pecuniary benefits as there was a property dispute between the family members.In this light, the Court held,"It is also to be noted that the other co-accused were already charge sheeted/prosecuted for the offence under the Gangsters Act and therefore the appellant and the other two co-accused being members of the ‘Gang’ were also required to be prosecuted for the offences under the Gangsters Act also like other co-accused.".Advocate Divyesh Pratap Singh appeared for the appellant. Advocate Sanjay Kumar Tyagi represented the respondents..[Read Judgment]