The Allahabad High Court, while addressing the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, observed that crime could be controlled by introducing appropriate legislations which is the foremost duty of the Legislature in a democratic country.
While referring to the provisions in the said enactment, the court stated that the purpose of such laws is to curb crime in the society and scuttle out the serious threats against the safety of citizens’, especially when the crime rate has taken the form of an “epidemic” in the country.
In the instant case, eight writ petitions had been filed which raised a common issue- whether on a registered solitary criminal case, a case under Sections 2 and 3 of the said enactment could be registered against the petitioners.
The court held that in a situation where a group of people act, either singly or collectively, with an object to disturb the public disorder or indulge in any anti-social activity mentioned under Section 2(b), then they would be considered as a gang under the said definition and a gangster as well who would subsequently be liable for a punishment under Section 3 of the act.
The court also placed reliance on a Allahabad High Court ruling where lodging of FIR under the Act on the basis of involvement of a single person also had been considered valid and legally permissible.
Moreover, the court highlighted the duty of courts to uphold the dignity of personal liberty and see whether any individual crosses the line carved out be law. It added that under such circumstances, individual should be treated appropriately as no one has the right to infringe someone else’s liberty.
Collectively, the court held that the Scheme of UP Gangsters Act nowhere prohibited lodging of FIR under the Act on the basis of a single case.
Leave a Reply