Ranjana Pandya, J. - (1.) This Criminal Misc. Application No. 32940 of 2015 has been preferred under Sec. 482 Cr.P.C. with prayer to quash the proceedings of G.S.T. No. 350 of 1999, State of U.P. v/s. Rakesh Chaudhary and others, arising out of Case Crime No. 376 of 1997 under Sec. 2/3 of the U.P. Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, Police Station Kotwali, District Mathura as well as the summoning order dated 29.10.1999 passed by the Special Judge (Gangsters Act), Agra in aforementioned G.S.T No. 350 of 1990. Further prayer is to stay the proceedings of G.S.T. No. 350 of 1999 and also the summoning order dated 29.10.1999 during the pendency of the present application.
(2.) Heard Sri G.S. Chaturvedi, learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.
(3.) It has been contended on behalf of the applicant that the learned court below has passed a cryptic order without assigning any reasons. It is further submitted that in all the cases mentioned in the gang -chart, the applicant has been acquitted. The applicant is a qualified advocate on record of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India. He has a law firm at New Delhi and does legal consulting and litigation cases on behalf of various Indian and Foreign Corporate Groups, Legal Entities and their subsidiary companies. It is further submitted that the applicant has been Standing Counsel for various Public Sector Banks/Entities like PNB, Allahabad Bank, NSIC etc. He has worked in various heavy stakes tax matters as a panel counsel for the Union of India before the Hon'ble Apex Court and presently is designated as Standing Counsel for State of J & K before the Hon'ble Apex Court with the status of Additional Advocate General. He has also been appointed as amicus curiae in matters by the Hon'ble Apex Court. He has also qualified A.R.O. Exam. He has been falsely implicated due to enmity when he was a student. On 29.10.1999, cognizance was taken by the Court. No notice of any kind was ever served upon the applicant. Thereafter, bailable warrants were issued against him which were also not served. Later on, non -bailable warrants were ordered to be issued. The applicant and co -accused Rakesh Chaudhary after lodging of the F.I.R. moved bail application (bearing number 353 of 1997) before the Special Judge (Gangsters Act), Agra but, ultimately, the bail application was rejected in absence of the applicant. No approval/sanction was granted by the District Magistrate. Thus, the prayer sought for is liable to be allowed.;