VIPIN VERMA Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND
LAWS(UTN)-2013-4-56
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
Decided on April 10,2013

Vipin Verma Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF UTTARAKHAND Respondents

JUDGEMENT

Umesh Chandra Dhyani, J. - (1.) BY way of this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner seeks to issue a writ in the nature of certiorari to quash the first information report dated 13.12.2012 in case crime No. 402 of 2012 under Section 2/3 of the U.P. Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention), Act, 1986 pertaining to police station Kotwali City, District Dehradun, lodged against the petitioner.
(2.) THE Gang Chart on the basis of which the impugned first information report was lodged against the petitioner is indicated herein below: i. Case crime No. 331 of 2012, under Sections 356, 411, 420, 467, 471 IPC, PS Kotwali, District Dehradun. ii. Case crime No. 82 of 2004, under Sections 356 and 411 IPC, PS Gang Nahar, Roorkee, Haridwar. iii. Case Crime No. 74 of 2004, under Sections 356 and 411 IPC, PS Gang Nahar, Roorkee, Haridwar. iv. Case crime No. 277 of 2007, under Section 307 IPC, PS Kotwali, Roorkee, District Haridwar. v. Case crime No. 280 of 2007, under Section 25 Arms Act, Kotwali, Roorkee, District Haridwar vi. Case Crime No. 330 of 2007, under Section 2/3 Gangsters Act, PS Kotwali, Roorkee, District Haridwar. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that in case crime No. 331 of 2012, the petitioner was not named in the first information report. The investigation has been completed in the case, but no charge sheet is submitted against the petitioner. In case crime No. 82 of 2004, the petitioner faced the trial and he was acquitted by the court below vide judgment which is enclosed as annexure - 3 to the writ petition. In case crime No. 74 of 2004 too, the accused -petitioner faced the trial and was acquitted by the court below vide order dated 24.12.2010 of 2nd Additional Civil Judge (J.D.)/J.M., Roorkee. In case crime No. 277 of 2007, charge sheet in respect of offence punishable under Section 307 IPC was submitted against the petitioner, to which he pleaded not guilty, claimed trial and the accused -petitioner was acquitted by the court below vide judgment which is enclosed as annexure 4 to the writ petition. In case crime No. 280 of 2007, the accused petitioner was acquitted vide judgment which is enclosed as annexure -4 to the writ petition. The offences punishable under Section 307 IPC and Section 25 Arms Act were tried together by Additional Sessions Judge, Roorkee. Lastly, case crime No. 330 of 2007, under Section 2/3 U.P. Gangsters and Anti -Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 is pending adjudication of the Special Judge, Haridwar.
(3.) IT is on the basis of such case crime No. (330 of 2007) that a fresh first information report was filed against the present petitioner, which according to law, is not permissible. When the first information report under Section 2/3 U.P. Gangsters and Anti -Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 was already filed against the petitioner, charge sheet submitted in the case and the trial is going on, how can the accused be implicated in the same Section on the basis of the same cases, which were shown in the Gang Chart? Consequently, the writ petition is allowed. First information report dated 13.12.2012 (annexure -1 to the writ petition), under Section 2/3 U.P. Gangsters and Anti -Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, registered in PS Kotwali City, District Dehradun is hereby quashed qua writ petitioner only.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.