Padma Mishra v. State of Uttarakhand & Anr.
INDIRA BANERJEE, J.
1. This appeal is against the Order dated 9.06.2009 passed by the
High Court of Uttarakhand at Nainital dismissing writ p etition No.
427/2009 filed by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India for quashing of an FIR instituted against the petitioner being FIR
No.179/2009 under Sections 2/3 of the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and
Anti-Social Activities (Prevention)Act,1986, ‘hereinafter referred’ to as
“Gangsters Act”.
Sections 2(b) and 2(c) of the Gangsters Act define as : “gang”
and Gangster.
2(b)‘‘Gang” means a group of persons, who acting either singly
or collectively, by violence, or threat or show of violence, or
intimidation, or coercion or otherwise with the object of disturbing
PADMA MISHRA v. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND & ANR.
public order or of gaining any undue temporal, pecuniary,
material or other advantage for himself or any other person, indulge
in anti-social activities.
2(c) ‘‘gangster” means a member or leader or organize r of a
gang and includes any person who abets or assists in the activities
of a gang enumerated in clause (b), whether before or after the
commission of such activities or harbours any person who has
indulged in such activities.
Section 3 of the Gangsters Act provides as follows:
3. “Penalty (1) A gangster, shall be punished with imprisonment
either description for a term which shall not be less t han two
years which may extend to ten years and also with fine which
shall not be less than five thousand rupees:
Provided that a gangster who commits an offence against
the person of a public servant or the person of a member of the
family of a public servant shall be punished with imprisonment of
either description for a term which shall not be less tha n three
years and also with fine which shall not be less than five thousand
rupees.”
The definition of gangster is made in the Gangsters Act and
includes any person who is a member or leader or organizer of a gang or
abets or assists in the activities of a gang, which includes violence, threat,
intimediation, coercion with the object of disturbing public order or of
going any undue advantage for himself or any other person.
2. In the FIR it is categorically stated that the appellant has, along
with others created terror, beating and fighting with the common people.
The FIR, in substance, contains the allegation that the appe llant and
others are taking recourse to public threats and coercion including physical
violence to gang the voices of witnesses in cases against them.
3. The FIR contains a list of various cases against the appellant
pending at the material time when the FIR was lodged and they included
offences under the relevant positions of the I.P.C., including Section 323
(voluntarily causing hurt), Section 506 (criminal intimedation) Section
504 (provoking breach of peace) Section 307 (attempt to mur der). It
cannot therefore, be said that the allegations in the FIR did not disclose
any act warranting penalization under the Gangsters Act.
1013
4. In proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,
the High Court does not adjudicate the correctness of the allegations in
an FIR.The Court may only intervene in exceptional ca ses, if the
allegations made in the FIR ex facie do not disclose any offence at all.
5. In our considered opinion, the High Court rightly refused to
quash the FIR under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and dismissed
the writ petition.
The Appeal is therefore, dismissed.
Pending application(s) stand disposed of.
Devika Gujral Appeal dismissed.
PADMA MISHRA v. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND & ANR.
[INDIRA BANERJEE, J.]