Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2024 DIGILAW 2519 (ALL)

Sumit Punjabi @ Sumit Arora v. State of U. P.

2024-12-13

VINOD DIWAKAR

body2024
JUDGMENT : Vinod Diwakar, J. 1 . Heard learned counsel for applicant and learned AGA for the State. 2 . Through the instant proceedings, the applicant has challenged the cognizance/summoning order dated 10.04.2024 on a limited ground that the Rules framed under the Provisions of U.P. Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act , 1986 have not been complied with by the police. 3 . Thus, the learned counsel for the applicant submits that; (i) besides Rules 16 and 17 of the Rules 2021, Rule 24 for expeditious investigation has been violated, (ii) the FIR was registered on 29.4.2022, whereas the charge sheet was filed on 3.2.2024 almost after a delay of 21 months and two days, (iii) the applicant is a businessman and he is arrayed as an accused in the base case on the basis of confessional statement of co- accused, which is impermissible under the law, (iv) the applicant's arrest was stayed by this Court vide order dated 1.8.2022, on Court's prima facie, satisfaction that the applicant is innocent and has been arrayed as an accused by the police because of ulterior reasons. 4 . Per contra, learned AGA states that the applicant is a habitual offender and three cases have been registered against the applicant of similar nature and there are serious allegations of running a gambling racket for illegal gain. 5 . Vide order dated 10.12.2024, all the Investigating Officers who had been part of the investigation were directed to present virtually through video conferencing, and in compliance of the order, the S.S.P. Baghpat appeared virtually along with Investigating Officers and apprised to the Court that the FIR was registered on 29.4.2022, thereafter, the investigation was conducted by ten Investigating Officers and on completion of the investigation the charge sheet was filed on 3.2.2024. The name of Investigation Officers along with the period for which the investigation was remained with them, are outlined herein in tabular format:- Sr No. Name of the Investigator Start of investigation and final submission of report Period of investigation 1 Inspector Shri Madan Pal Singh 29.4.2022 01 day 2 In-charge Inspector Shri Novendra Singh Sirohi from 30.4.2022 to 13.08.2022 03 months and 13 days 3. Inspector Shri Indrapal Singh from 01.09.2022 to 27.10.2022 1 month and 27 days 4. S.H.O. Shri Virendra Rana from 19.11.2022 to 20.11.2022 02 days 5. Inspector Shri Indrapal Singh from 01.09.2022 to 27.10.2022 1 month and 27 days 4. S.H.O. Shri Virendra Rana from 19.11.2022 to 20.11.2022 02 days 5. S.I. Shri Bhurendra Singh from 15.12.2022 to 16.12.2022 02 days 6. In-charge Inspector Shri Satendra Singh Siddhu From 10.01.2023 to 20.5.2023 04 months and 10 days 7. In-charge Inspector Shri Kaushlendra Singh from 18.06.2023 to 3.8.2023 01 month and 15 days 8. In-charge Inspector Shri Bachchu Singh from 13.08.2023 to 28.09.2023 01 month and 15 days 9. In-charge Inspector Shri Pradeep Dodiyal from 2.10.2023 to 2.12.2023 02 months 10. Inspector Shri Jitendra Kumar from 4.12.2023 to 3.2.2024 02 months 6 . For clarity, Rule 24 of the U.P. Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Rules, 2021 is extracted herein below: “The rule stipulates the investigation shall be conducted expeditiously within six months of the registration of the case and in unavoidable circumstances with the approval of the District Police In-Charge, a maximum extension of three months can be provided but in no case the investigation cannot be extended for more than one year.” 7 . In the instant case, the charge sheet was filed after a delay of 21 months and 2 days and the same is in contravention of Rule 24. 8 . The provisions of Gangsters Act is stringent in nature and the idea is to punish declared criminals who have deliberately chosen the life of crime. The activities of these professionals perpetrators of organized crimes and violence, and orgy has a far more baneful effect on the health and morals of the society and its people. If the activity of such criminal are subjected to the same punishment as that other ordinary criminals, the confidence of public in the efficacy and efficiency of the state administration is bound to shake. 9 . It is noticed that the Investigating Officers have not followed the procedure of the Act in a letter and spirit, may be for the reasons best known to them. The State Government had issued various Government Orders and Notifications to streamline the procedure to invoke the provisions of the Gangsters Act. Unfortunately, the police have not been following them in letter and spirit. The State Government had issued various Government Orders and Notifications to streamline the procedure to invoke the provisions of the Gangsters Act. Unfortunately, the police have not been following them in letter and spirit. Therefore, it was desired by the State to frame the U.P. Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Rules, 2021 under the Act and that is how the U.P. Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Rules, 2021 came into existence in exercise of power conferred by Section 23 of the U.P. Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act , 1986 in suppression of all earlier Government Orders and Notifications made thereunder. 10 . In the instant case, the investigation travelled through ten Investigating Officers and none of the Investigating Officer followed Rule 24 of the Rules, 2021 the reason best known to the Investigating Officers, and the S.S.P. and District Magistrate as well who had approved the gang chart did not care about compliance of rules. Its premature in instant proceedings to come to any conclusion as to who is responsible for the delay in investigation and at whose behest the investigation has been delayed intentionally or unintentionally. The ignorance of law or statutory provision is no excuse based on the most basic and cardinal principles of jurisprudence of law. There is a thin line between knowing everything and well informed and this particular role expects a prudent officer to understand his role, duties and responsibilities of the post which he is holding, the onus remains individual officers to act diligence, integrity, and awareness of the law they are sworn to uphold. 11 . The legal maxim ignorantia juris non excusat-is a corner stone of legal systems globally, emphasizing that individuals are presumed to know the law and cannot evade liability or responsibility by claiming ignorance. The police officers are entrusted with the enforcement of laws and the administration of justice, this principles assumes high significance particularly when the police officers fail to fulfil their statutory duties on conducting investigation within prescribed time frame knowingfully the repercussions of non following the statutory duty in a time bound manner. It could be a case of negligence, lack of adequate training, or wilful misconduct, but none of these excuses absolve the police officer from liability therefore, ensuring accountability through legal process and institutional reforms by imparting training is essential to uphold justice and public trust in law enforcement. It could be a case of negligence, lack of adequate training, or wilful misconduct, but none of these excuses absolve the police officer from liability therefore, ensuring accountability through legal process and institutional reforms by imparting training is essential to uphold justice and public trust in law enforcement. 12 . Based on the aforesaid deliberations, it cannot be construed that all ten Investigating Officers were not aware about the Rule 24 of the U.P. Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Rules, 2021. Giving benefit to the criminals who is systematically operating a gang which is involved in gambling and other cases in similar nature would sake the people’s confidence in police administration in upholding the rule of law therefore, a time bound departmental inquiry-not for namesake be conducted with a message to other police officers to realize the importance of position and function they are discharging so that a strong message may go. The Investigating Officer involved in the case for first six months shall not be given any field posting - any posting where the officers would be in- charge/I.O./supervise of the investigation - till the completion of the departmental inquiry initiated by the S.S.P. Baghpat. 13 . In view of the aforesaid deliberations, the entire proceedings of Special Sessions Trial No. 15/2024, Session Case No. 461 of 2024 titled as State vs. Anil @ Kalu and others arising out of Case Crime No. 389 of 2022, under Section 2/3 Gangster Act, P.S. Baghpat, District Baghpat are quashed qua all the accused named in the charge sheet, with liberty to the police to prepare fresh gang chart in accordance with the U.P. Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Rules, 2021. 14 . The instant application is disposed of accordingly. 15 . The Registrar (Compliance) is directed to transmit forthwith a copy of this order to the D.G.P. Uttar Pradesh for strict compliance.