Allahabad High Court Quashes Gangster FIR | Directs UP Govt To Apprise District Magistrates Of SC And HC Guidelines | Orders Fresh Training On Invoking Gangsters Act If Needed
Sanchayita Lahkar
The High Court of Allahabad Division Bench of Justice Alok Mathur and Justice Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal held that the impugned First Information Report under the U.P. Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 was liable to be quashed due to non-compliance with mandatory procedural requirements under the Gangsters Rules, 2021. The court observed that the approval of the gang chart by the District Magistrate was done in an arbitrary and mechanical manner without recording the requisite satisfaction mandated under Rule 16 of the Rules and judicial precedents. Consequently, the court directed the quashing of the FIR and the gang chart pertaining to the petitioners.
The court further directed the Chief Secretary of the State of Uttar Pradesh to review and reinforce compliance mechanisms by reiterating the guidelines issued by both the High Court and the Supreme Court to all District Magistrates. The court granted liberty to the authorities to initiate fresh proceedings, strictly in accordance with the procedural safeguards provided under the Gangsters Act and the 2021 Rules.
The writ petition involved a challenge to the FIR dated 28.04.2025 registered as Case Crime No. 172 of 2025 under Sections 2(b)(i) and 3 of the U.P. Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 at Police Station Bhira, District Kheri. The petitioners prayed for quashing the FIR and the gang chart associated with it on the ground that the District Magistrate failed to record the satisfaction required for approval of the gang chart in accordance with the statutory requirements and judicial directions.
Counsel for the petitioners argued that the gang chart was approved by the District Magistrate without recording a valid satisfaction as prescribed under Rule 16 of the U.P. Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Rules, 2021. The approval merely stated, "discussed with Superintendent of Police and Committee and proposal approved," which, according to the petitioners, amounted to non-application of mind.
The petitioners relied upon multiple judgments including Sanni Mishra @ Sanjayan Kumar Mishra vs State of U.P. and others, 2023 SCC OnLine All 2975; Abdul Lateef @ Mustak Khan vs State of U.P. and others, 2024 SCC OnLine All 3900; and Vinod Bihari Lal vs State of U.P., 2025 SCC OnLine SC 1216. They argued that these decisions clearly mandate the requirement of recording a reasoned and explicit satisfaction by the competent authority while approving gang charts.
The petitioners also referred to a Government Order dated 02.12.2024 which laid down detailed guidelines for the preparation, forwarding, and approval of gang charts. As per the Government Order, the District Magistrate must hold a joint meeting with the District Police Chief and record the minutes of such meetings in a dedicated register. The District Magistrate must verify and satisfy themselves regarding the material placed before them before granting approval to a gang chart.
The Additional Government Advocate for the State opposed the petition but was unable to dispute the factual assertion that the approval of the gang chart lacked the necessary satisfaction. The State did not place on record any register or minutes of a joint meeting between the District Magistrate and the Superintendent of Police. The court took note of this absence while evaluating the legality of the approval process.
The court also acknowledged that despite several judicial directives and government-issued circulars reiterating the proper procedure, some District Magistrates and police officers continued to act in violation. The specific conduct of the District Magistrate, Lakhimpur Kheri in this case, who approved the gang chart on 21.03.2025 post issuance of State-level guidelines and training programmes, was taken as indicative of non-compliance.
The petitioners further relied on the judgments in Rajeev Kumar @ Raju vs State of U.P., Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 9428 of 2024, and Lal Mohammad and another vs State of U.P., SLP (Crl) No. 6607 of 2023, which state strict procedural adherence to ensure constitutional guarantees under Article 21 are not violated while invoking the Gangsters Act.
The court recorded that "it is not in dispute that while registering the FIR, it is necessary that the gang chart should be approved according to the Gangsters Act as well as Rules framed therein.” It stated that the approval recorded by the District Magistrate, “discussed with Superintendent of Police and Committee and proposal approved,” amounted to “absolutely non-application of mind.”
Quoting paragraph 22 of Sanni Mishra @ Sanjayan Kumar Mishra, the court noted:
"(ii) While forwarding or approving the gang-chart, competent authorities must record their required satisfaction by writing in clear words, not by signing the printed/typed satisfaction."
The Bench cited paragraph 56 of Vinod Bihari Lal, observing: "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 stated the Supreme Court's view in Lal Mohammad, where it held: “The power conferred upon the State cannot be wielded as an instrument of harassment or intimidation, particularly where political motivations may be at play.”
The Bench also observed from Abdul Lateef @ Mustak Khan: "Despite issuance of circulars by the Chief Secretary, Govt. of U.P. as well as the Director General of Police to all the District Magistrates... this Court found that some of the officers were still not following the procedure.”
The court remarked: “This fact shows that a training programme conducted by the State Government has no effect on the District Magistrate, Lakhimpur Kheri.”
The court quashed the FIR and gang chart in the present matter, stating: “In view of above, the writ petition is allowed. The impugned FIR as well as gang chart is hereby quashed so far as petitioner is concerned.”
It recorded that the existing gang chart did not conform to Rule 16 of the 2021 Rules or the mandates of the court's prior judgments: “From the above analysis, it is clear that the gang chart of the impugned F.I.R. itself is prepared in violation to the Rules, 2021 as well as the direction issued by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court... and also against the guidelines dated 02.12.2024 of Government of U.P...”
The court further ordered: “Chief Secretary, Govt. of U.P. is directed to look into this issue and shall apprise all the District Magistrates about the guidelines and directions issued by the High Court and Supreme Court regarding preparation of gang chart for invocation of Gangsters Act.”
It also mandated that: “Senior Registrar of this Court is directed to communicate this order to the Chief Secretary, Government of U.P. for its compliance.”
While quashing the FIR, the court allowed liberty for lawful future action: “The authority concerned is at liberty to initiate fresh proceedings under The U.P. Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 after preparing the gang chart in accordance with the law as mentioned above.”
Advocates Representing the Parties:
For the Petitioners: Sri Syed Raza Mehdi, Advocate
For the Respondents: Learned AGA for the State
Case Title: Shabbir Husain and Another vs State of U.P. Thru Prin Secy Home Civil Sectt Lko and 3 Others
Neutral Citation: 2025: AHC-LKO:36793-DB
Case Number: Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 5658 of 2025
Bench: Justice Alok Mathur, Justice Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal
