'Abuse Of Process' : Supreme Court Quashes UP Gangster Act FIR Against SHUATS University Director

The Supreme Court today (May 23) quashed the two first information reports registered against Vinod Bihari Lal, the Director of Sam Higginbottom University of Agriculture Technology and Science (SHUATS), Prayagraj, under the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986. It stated that the said FIRs were nothing but an abuse of the process of law. "It cannot be gainsaid that the materials garnered during the investigation only ignite conjectures and surmises, and do not make out a prima facie case to be proceeded against the appellant under the Act of 1986. At the stage of forwarding and approving the gang-chart, the competent authorities are under the obligation to record their satisfaction that a case for action under the Act of 1986 is made out, and the gang-chart and other records should reflect such satisfaction. The impugned judgment and consequently, the impugned order clearly bring about a situation which is an abuse of the process of the court which makes the interference of this Court necessary. We are of a firm view that continuation of criminal proceedings against the appellant herein would result in undue harassment when there is no material against him and will result in the abuse of process of law."A bench of Justice JB Pardiwala and Justice Manoj Misra also thereby set aside the orders and judgment passed by the Allahabad High Court whereby the latter had refused to quash the criminal proceedings, including non-bailable warrants issued against the Appellant under Sections 2 and 3 of the 1986 Act. It ordered: "We are convinced that the continuation of the Special Sessions trial no. 54/2019 arising out of FIR no. 850/2018 registered at Naini Police Station, district Allahabad, Uttar Pradesh is nothing but the abuse of the process of law."The allegation against the Appellant was that he is the leader of an "organised" gang comprising two men, and they are proficient in the commission of economic offences through fraud and deceit, being offences of the kind described in Chapters XVI, XVII, and XXII of the Indian Penal Code, 1960. It was further alleged that by the perpetration of such offences, the members of the gang gain personal, material and pecuniary benefits for themselves, which they do by tampering and forging documents.Lastly, it stated that by the commissioning of such offences, they accumulated wealth, and because of their fear and terror among members of the public, no one came forward to lodge a report against them or muster the courage to testify in Court. Justice JJ Munir of the High Court had held that violence in one form or another is not a sine qua non for a group of persons to qualify as a 'gang' under Section 2(b) of the 1986 Act. It concluded that temporal and pecuniary advantages may be gained through anti-social activities of a non-violent kind as well, so long as there is a group of persons determined to do it individually or in unison.The Supreme Court observed that the FIRs are an abuse of process of law, it further ordered: "It is in this result that the appeals succeed and are hereby allowed. The impugned judgment and order dated 19 April 2023 rendered by the High Court at juridicature Allahabad rejected the application under Section 482 CrPC referred by the Appellant for the quashing of the proceedings and rejected of the application preferred by the Appellant for quashing of non-bailable warrants in the order dated 28-2-2023 and 14-3-2023 are hereby set aside. Resultantly, the criminal proceedings arising from FIR 850/2018 dated 27-8-2018 registered as P.S. Naini District Allahabad, Uttar Pradesh, are hereby quashed."Justice Pardiwala said after pronouncing the verdict: "In this case, my lawclerk Sakshi drew our attention that there are now guidelines issued by you pursuant to some order passed by the court. We have looked into and we want you to adhere to your guidelines"The Court has clarified that the observations made in this judgment are relevant only for the purpose of the subject FIR in question and the consequential criminal proceedings. None of the observations shall have any bearing on any of the pending criminal prosecutions or any other proceedings.On October 18, last year, the Court reserved the judgment in a batch of petitions seeking to quash the criminal cases against the Vice Chancellor and other officials of the SHUATS, Prayagraj, over alleged forced mass religious conversions of people to Christianity.Case Details: VINOD BIHARI LAL Versus THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND ANR., Crl.A. No. 000777 - 000778 / 2025 (and connected matters)Appearance: Senior Advocate Siddharth Dave along with AOR Pallavi Sharma for Vinod Bihari and Additional Advocate General for Uttar Pradesh, Garima Prashad Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 615Click here to read the judgment

'Abuse Of Process' : Supreme Court Quashes UP Gangster Act FIR Against SHUATS University Director

Gursimran Kaur Bakshi

Tags