Allahabad High Court Dismisses Former SP MLA Irfan Solanki’s Section 528 BNSS Plea, Declines To Quash Gangsters Act Proceedings
Isabella Mariam
The High Court of Allahabad, Single Bench of Justice Samit Gopal last week dismissed former Samajwadi Party MLA Irfan Solanki’s bid to have proceedings under the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 set aside, and declined to interfere with the ongoing trial. The court noted that evidence recording was already underway and the matter had reached an advanced stage. The prosecution case, as reflected in the FIR material placed before the court, alleges that a gang was involved in offences for financial gain, including an incident of alleged arson and threats aimed at forcibly occupying a plot.
The prosecution case originated from an FIR alleging that the applicant was the leader of an organised gang involved in activities such as arson, intimidation, forcible occupation of property, cheating, and extortion, resulting in fear among the public. A gang chart was prepared and approved by senior police authorities, followed by filing of a charge sheet and cognizance by the trial court.
Subsequently, an application for discharge was rejected, charges were framed, and the trial commenced. By the time the present application was heard, prosecution witnesses had already been examined, and the trial had progressed to the stage of cross-examination. The applicant alleged political vendetta, violation of statutory rules governing approval of gang charts, and non-application of mind by competent authorities. The State opposed the plea, asserting that the challenge was belated and untenable once the trial had substantially progressed.
The Court observed that “this petition under Section 528 B.N.S.S., 2023 (corresponding to Section 482 Cr.P.C.) has been filed … with the prayers to quash the proceedings” after charges had already been framed and the trial had commenced.
The Court recorded that “the stage of trial at the present moment is not disputed by learned counsels for the parties being the stage of cross-examination of P.W.-2 after completion of his examination-in-chief and also completion of recording of testimony of P.W.-1.”
On the challenge to cognizance and summoning, the Court stated that “the orders taking cognizance and summoning cannot be looked into at this stage for the purpose of quashing since after the same the application for discharge was filed … which stood rejected by the trial court, subsequent to which charge has been framed.”
Dealing with allegations of procedural violations in approval of the gang chart, the Court noted that “it transpires that the Commissioner of Police concerned on 25.12.2022 gave his opinion independently in it while approving the same” and that “it thus cannot be said that he merely signed on a pre-formatted gang chart while according approval.”
On the plea of political vengeance, the Court referred to settled law and recorded that “a criminal case cannot be quashed on the ground of political vengeance.”
The Court further observed that “after framing of charge there cannot be a discharge but only an acquittal can be done on a finding of not guilty turning on the merits of the case.”
It was also observed that “exercise of inherent power of the High Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is an exceptional one” and that interference at an advanced stage of trial would not be justified unless the case fell within narrowly defined categories.
Applying the four-step test laid down by the Supreme Court, the Court recorded that “the non-fulfillment of the conditions of the four-step test does not call for this Court to consider it a fit case for interference.”
The Court directed that “the present application under Section 528 B.N.S.S. is dismissed. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.”
Advocates Representing the Parties
For the Petitioners: Sri Imran Ullah, Senior Advocate, assisted by Sri Mohit Singh and Sri Vineet Vikram, Advocates
For the Respondents: Sri Manish Goel, Senior Advocate / Additional Advocate General, assisted by Sri Rupak Chaubey, AGA-I
Case Title: Irfan Solanki v. State of Uttar Pradesh and Another
Neutral Citation: 2026: AHC:20761
Case Number: Application under Section 528 BNSS No. 46079 of 2025
Bench: Justice Samit Gopal
