JUDGMENT
Ravindra Singh, J.
1. This application has been filed by the applicant Jai Prakash Singh @ J.P. Singh with a prayer to quash the chargesheet dated 10.3.2003 in case crime No. 249 of 2002 under Section 3(1) U.P. Gangster and Anti Social Activities of Prevention Act, 1986, P.S. Maruwadeeh, Varanasi pending in the court of learned Special Judge (Gangster Act), Varanasi vide S.T. No. 598 of 2003.
2. The facts in brief of this case are that the F.I.R. of this case has been lodged by Sri Avadh Ram Yadav, Station Officer of Police Station, Maruwadeeh, district Varanasi on 6.10.2002 in case crime No. 249 of 2002 and in support of the F.I.R. a gang chart has been filed in which two casses have been shown against the applicant as case crime No. 233 of 2002 under Section 302 IPC, and case crime No. 238 of 2002 under Sections 504, 506 IPC, P.S. Maruwadeeh, District Varanasi and it has been alleged in the F.I.R. that the applicant and co-accused Rajesh Khanna are gangster and hardened criminal, they with association of other criminals are carrying on a gang and they are gang leaders, they taken the help of other criminals also time to time and for wrongful gain they commit the offences punishable under the chapter 16, 17 and 22 of IPC. Due to anti social activities committed by the applicant and other a fear and terror has been created in the public which constitutes the offence punishable under Section 3(1) of U.P. Gangster & Anti Social Activities Act, 1986. The matter was investigated, thereafter the chargesheet dated 19.2.2003 has been submitted against the applicant in the court of learned Special Judge (Gangster Act) Varanasi who has taken the cognizance and summoned the applicant to face the trial vide order dated 23.10.2003. The applicant has moved a discharge application before the learned Special Judge concerned but the same has been rejected on 13.4.2007. Being aggrieved from the order dated 13.4.2007 the applicant filed the present application.
3. Heard Sri P.K. Singh, learned Counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State of U.P.
4. It is contended by learned Counsel for the applicant that only two criminal cases have been shown against the applicant, in the F.I.R. and the gang chart as case crime No. 233 of 2002 under Section 302 IPC and case crime No. 238 of 2002 under Section 504 and 506 I.P.C. The FIRs of both the cases have been lodged by one person namely Krishna Kumar Gava. The applicant has been acquitted on 1.12.2004 in S.T. No. 67 of 2007 arising out of ase crime No. 238 of 2002 by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge /FTC-4, Varanasi and in the second case crime No. 238 of 2002 was also the applicant has been acquitted on 7.5.2005 by learned C.J.M. Varanasi vide criminal case No. 3199 of 2004. The applicant is central Government employee, he is neither gangster nor involved in anti social activities but he was falsely implicated in two cases which were registered by Krishna Kumar Gava. In both the cases he has been been acquitted which shows that the applicant was falsely implicated due to enmity. The ground of the prosecution of the applicant in the present case is not longer in existence and by the same person the F.I.Rs. were lodged, therefore, no offence under Section 3(1) of U.P. Gangster and Anti Social Activities of Prevention Act is made out. Learned Special Judge concerned has rejected the discharge application on 13.4.2007 without applying the judicial mind. The order dated 13.4.2007 is illegal and is liable to be set aside and the applicant is liable for the discharge, therefore, he may be discharged for the offence initiated under Section 3(1) of U.P. Gangster and Anti Social j Activities of Prevention Act.
5. In respect of this contention the learned Counsel for the applicant has cited a case passed by this Hon’ble High Court i.e. Mahendra Patel v. State of U.P. and Ors. 2006 (2) J.I.C. 398 (All) in which it was held by the Hon’ble Single Judge of this Court that same person has lodged; the F.I.R. in three cases, therefore no offence under Gangster Act is made out and quashed the chargesheet.
6. In reply of the above contention, it is submitted by learned A.G.A. that in lodging the F.I.R. under Section 3(1) of U.P. Gangster and Anti Social Activities of Prevention Act the registration of the criminal cases against the person concerned is not necessary because such provisions are made for those persons who are having a terror in the society either nobody dare to lodge the F.I.R. or adduced the evidence against them, if F.I.R. are not lodged or such person acquitted which shows that the persons concerned is having terror in the society, therefore, the prosecution of such person is proper.
7. The learned Special Judge has rightly rejected the discharge application by order dated 13.4.2007. The present application is having no merit and is liable to be dismissed.
8. Accordingly this application is dismissed.