Farhana vs. State of Uttar Pradesh [February 19, 2024]
The case of Farhana vs. State of Uttar Pradesh (2024 INSC 118) concerned the prosecution of the appellants, Farhana and Sadarul Islam, under Section 3(1) of the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 (“Gangsters Act”). The core issue was whether proceedings under the Gangsters Act could be sustained when the foundational (“predicate”) criminal cases against the appellants had already been quashed by the High Court.
Facts
An FIR (Crime Case No. 424 of 2022) was registered against the appellants under Section 3(1) of the Gangsters Act at Police Station Bhognipur, Kanpur Dehat.
The registration of this FIR was based on earlier criminal cases against the appellants.
The appellants challenged the Gangsters Act FIR before the Allahabad High Court, arguing that the predicate cases had been quashed, so there was no basis for prosecution under the Gangsters Act.
The High Court dismissed their petitions, relying on the precedent Shraddha Gupta v. State of Uttar Pradesh, which allowed Gangsters Act prosecution even if only one FIR was registered under certain IPC chapters.
Arguments
Appellants: Contended that since the predicate FIRs (Crime Case No. 190 of 2021 and Crime Case No. 173 of 2019) had been quashed, no criminal case involving anti-social activity was pending against them. Thus, the foundation for invoking the Gangsters Act was absent, and the FIR under the Gangsters Act should be quashed.
State: Argued that as per Shraddha Gupta, prosecution under the Gangsters Act could proceed if there was at least one FIR at the time of registration.
Supreme Court’s Findings
The Supreme Court held that prosecution under the Gangsters Act cannot be continued if the predicate FIR, which forms the basis of the Gangsters Act case, is quashed. The Court reasoned that once the foundational criminal case is set aside, the very basis for invoking the Gangsters Act disappears. Continuing prosecution in such circumstances would be unjustified and contrary to law.
Judgment
The Supreme Court set aside the impugned orders of the Allahabad High Court dated November 14, 2022, and December 6, 2022.
The FIR registered under Section 3(1) of the Gangsters Act (Crime Case No. 424 of 2022) and all related proceedings against the appellants were quashed.
Significance
This judgment clarifies that proceedings under the Gangsters Act are not sustainable if the underlying criminal cases are quashed. It reinforces the principle that criminal prosecution must have a valid and subsisting factual foundation. The decision protects individuals from being prosecuted under the Gangsters Act based on allegations that have already been judicially nullified.
Conclusion
The Supreme Court’s ruling ensures that the invocation of stringent laws like the Gangsters Act must be firmly rooted in valid, ongoing criminal proceedings. If the predicate offences are quashed, any derivative prosecution under special statutes must also be set aside.
RELATED Blog
0 comments