JUDGMENT Hon’ble Ravindra Singh, J.—This application has been filed by the applicants Irfan Ullah, Ahsan and Subhan Ullah with• the prayer to quash the order dated 30.7.2008 passed by learned Special Judge (Gangster Act) Kanpur Nagar in S.T. No. 249 of 2002 whereby the discharge-application filed by the applicants has been rejected. 2. The facts in brief of this case are that the FIR has been lodged by Sri Som Dutt Sharma, S.H.O. of Police Station Kotwali, District Etawah on 4.1.2007 at 4.35 p.m. in case crime No. 29 of 2002 under Section 2/3 U.P. Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 alleging therein that the applicants are going on storing the explosive substance (crackers), illegally selling the same and are earning the money for their own interest in the said area, due to which the license holders of the explosive substance (crackers) etc. are too much fear and due to their terror nobody daring to depose against them. Due to illegal storage of explosive substance and its selling a great explosion may be done due to which the damage of the property and public life at a large scale may be caused. The applicants are involved in commission of the offence described in Chapter 16, 17 and 22 of IPC. Its gang leader is applicant Irfan Ullahah, the applicant Ahsan and Subhan Ullah are its active members. The applicants are involved in many cases punishable under the provisions of Explosive Act. In the gang chart six cases each have been shown against applicants Irfan Ullah and Ahsan and eight cases have been shown against the applicant Subhan Ullah, all the cases are punishable under Explosive Substance Act. The gang charge has been approved by District Magistrate, Etawah on 11.1.2002. After approval the FIR has been lodged against the applicants. After investigation the charge-sheet has been submitted against the applicants and learned Special Judge (Gangsters Act) Kanpur Nagar has taken the cognizance and summoned the applicants to face the trial. The gang charge has been approved by District Magistrate, Etawah on 11.1.2002. After approval the FIR has been lodged against the applicants. After investigation the charge-sheet has been submitted against the applicants and learned Special Judge (Gangsters Act) Kanpur Nagar has taken the cognizance and summoned the applicants to face the trial. Thereafter the applicants moved an discharge­application before Special Judge (Gangster Act), Kanpur Nagar with a prayer that the cases shown against the applicants punishable under the provisions of Explosive Substance Act are not under the provisions of the definition of the gang defined in Section 2(b) of U.P. Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 and no case is covering under Chapter 16, 17 and 22 of I.P.C. has been lodged against the applicants. In such circumstances, no offence under Section 2/3 of U.P. Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 is made out against the applicants. But the learned Special Judge (Gangsters Act), Kanpur Nagar has dismissed the same vide order dated 30.7.2008. Being aggrieved from the order dated 30.7.2008 the present application has been filed by the applicants. 3. Heard Sri Dileep Kumar, Sri Rajiv Gupta and Sri Rajarshi Gupta, learned counsel for the. applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State of U.P. 4. It is contended by learned counsel for the applicants that according to the FIR and its gang chart six cases each have been shown against the applicants Irfan Ullah and Ahsan and eight cases have been shown against the applicant Subhan Ullah, all the cases are punishable under the provisions of Explosive Substance Act. The cases mentioned in the gang chart do not come under the provisions of definition of Gang. On the basis of six cases prosecution of the applicants may not be done under Section 2/3 of U.P. Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986. 5. It is further contended that it has been wrongly mentioned in the F1R that applicants are indulging in committing the offence described in Chapter 16, 17 and 22 of Indian Penal Code because no such case has been registered against the applicants even in gang chart no such case has been shown but without doing the fair investigation in a mechanical manner for the purpose of harassment of the applicants, the FIR has been lodged and without doing the fair investigation the charge-sheet has been submitted. Thereafter the learned Special Judge (Gangster Act) wrongfully rejected the discharge-application filed by the applicants vide impugned order dated 30.7.2008. The order dated 30.7.2008 is illegal and is liable to be set aside. 6. In reply of the above contention, it is submitted by learned A.G.A. that in the FIR itself it has been mentioned that due to storage and sale of explosive substances the fear and terror has been created. Due to the storage of explosive substances the fear of the explosion has been created and nobody is daring to depose the evidence against the applicants. The allegation made in the FIR are clearly disclosing the offence punishable under Section 2/3 U.P. Gangsters Act. So far as the registration of the cases against the applicants punishable Explosive Substance Act are concerned, it is a supporting material to establish that due to involvement in such cases and having the illegal storage of explosive substance panic and terror have been created, comes under the purview of the definition of gang as defined in Section 2(b) of Section 2/3 U.P. Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986. The trial Court has rightly rejected the application filed by the applicants because prima facie offence under Section 3(1) of U.P. Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 is made out. There is no illegality in the impugned order, therefore, the prayer for quashing the impugned order dated 30.7.2008 may be refused. 7. Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State of U.P. and from the perusal of the record it appears that the FIR has been lodged against the applicants after obtaining the sanction from the District Magistrate, Etawah. The allegations have been made against the applicants that there are illegal storage and selling explosive substance (crackers), due to such storage and sale the fear of high explosion has also been created. The persons who are having the licence of explosive substance are under the fear, they are not in a position to give the evidence against the applicants. The allegations have been made against the applicants that there are illegal storage and selling explosive substance (crackers), due to such storage and sale the fear of high explosion has also been created. The persons who are having the licence of explosive substance are under the fear, they are not in a position to give the evidence against the applicants. The applicants are illegally earning the money by doing the illegal business and they are committing the offence covered by the chapter 16,17 and 22 of the I.P.C. Six cases each have been registered against applicants Irfan Ullah and Ahsan which are of Explosive Substance Act and eight cases are registered against applicant No. 3 Subhan Ullah. Other cases registered against the applicants do not come under the purview of the definition of the Gang as defined in Section 2(b) of the Act. But according to definition of Gang as defined in Section 2(b) reads as under : 2(b) “Gang” means a group of persons, who acting either singly or collectively, by violence, or threat or show of violence, or intimidation, or coercion or otherwise with the object of disturbing public order or of gaining any undue temporal, pecuniary, material or other advantage for himself of any other person, indulge in anti-social activities.” 8. The Clause II of the definition shows that if a group of persons who acting either singly or collectively indulge in which social activities clearly creating panic, alarm or terror in public. In the present case for constituting the offence Section 2(b) II is applicable because for creating the panic, alarm or ten:-or in public no specific Act has been defined. It means to indulge in any undue social activities a panic, alarm and terror in public is created. The involvement of such persons come under the purview of the gang which is punishable under Section 3 of the Gangster Act. In the present case also, though the case registered against the applicants do not come under the purview of Gangster Act but due to involvement of the applicants in cases registered against them panic, alarm and terror has been created in the public which is constituting the commission of the offence. 9. The meaning of work ‘Alarm’ according to English dictionary collins cobuild is : (i) Alarm is a feeling of fear or anxiety that something unpleasant or dangerous might happen. 9. The meaning of work ‘Alarm’ according to English dictionary collins cobuild is : (i) Alarm is a feeling of fear or anxiety that something unpleasant or dangerous might happen. (ii) If something alarms you, it makes you afraid or anxious that something unpleasant or dangerous might happen (iii) An alarm is an automatic device that warns you of danger, for example by ringing a bell 10. According to Webster’s dictionary the definition of ‘Alarm” is a signal warning of danger, an excited frightened anticipation of danger. 11. The definition of word ‘Panic’ according to English dictionary collins cobuild is : (i) Panic is a very strong feeling of anxiety or fear which makes you act without thinking carefully. (ii) Panic is a situation in which people are affected by a strong feeling of anxiety. (iii) If you panic or if someone panics you, you suddenly feel anxious or afraid, and act quickly and without thinking carefully. 12. The definition of work ‘Terror’ according to English dictionary collins cobuild is : (i) Terror is very great fear. (ii) Terror is violence or the threat of violence, especially when, it is used for political reasons. (iii) A terror is something that makes you very frightened. 13. According to Webster dictionary it is defined as a person or thing that causes a great feel. 14. According to the definition of above mentioned word panic, alarm and terror as mentioned in the definition of Section 2(b) XI all contents of the fear are attracting this definition. 15. So far as the registration of cases allegedly committed by the applicants covering the Chapter 16, 17 and 22, IPC are concerned it is not necessary because against such persons nobody dares to lodge the FIR etc. for registration of the cases covered by Chapter 16, 17 and 22, IPC is not a pre condition for lodging the FIR or framing the charge. For this purpose, the allegation made in the FIR are to be considered. For constitution of the offence under Section 3 of U.P. Gangsters Act the registration of the case is not necessarily required, if such cases registered, the same is shown in the gang chart for the purpose of evidence and for the purpose of obtaining the sanction from the District Magistrate of lodging the FIR. For constitution of the offence under Section 3 of U.P. Gangsters Act the registration of the case is not necessarily required, if such cases registered, the same is shown in the gang chart for the purpose of evidence and for the purpose of obtaining the sanction from the District Magistrate of lodging the FIR. If no such case is mentioned in the gang chart but allegation made in the FIR and constituting the offence punishable under Section 3 of U.P. Gangster and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act the charge-sheet may be submitted after collecting the material in support of such allegation and thereafter the charge may also be framed. 16. In view of the above discussions, it appears that the learned Special Judge (Gangster Act) has not committed any illegality and irregularities in passing the impugned order dated 30.7.2008 by which the discharge-application filed by the applicants has been dismissed. The impugned order is not suffering from any illegality or irregularities, the prayer for quashing the impugned order dated 30.7.2008 is refused. 17. Accordingly this application is dismissed. ———