Noticing that there is no uniformity in the executive authorities of the districts of UP regarding the applicability of the deterrent enactment i.e., Uttar Pradesh Control of Goondas Act, 1970, causing unwarranted piling up of the cases, the Allahabad High Court directed the State Government to form a uniform guideline regarding the applicability of the said Act.

The High Court quashed the show cause notice dated June 15, 2023, issued by the Additional District Magistrate (Finance & Revenue), Aligarh, in Case No. 3400 of 2023, State Vs. Govardhan), under Section 3 of the Uttar Pradesh Control of Goondas Act, 1970, Police Station Chharra, District Aligarh.

The Division Bench of Justice Rahul Chaturvedi and Justice Mohd. Azhar Husain Idrisi observed, "...we are witnessing rampant misuse of the provisions of Uttar Pradesh Control of Goondas Act, 1970. There is no uniformity in the executive authorities of the districts of UP regarding applicability of this deterrent enactment causing unwarranted piling up of the cases, challenging the notices under this Act etc. Thus in this regard, it is directed that the State Government too would form a uniform guide lines regarding the applicability of this Act in the light of the above judgment."

The Court further observed that “In the impugned notice, there is a description of only one criminal case and one beat report against the petitioner while as per the definition and law settled by the Hon'ble Apex Court as well as by this Court "one" cannot be treated to be a 'habitual offender' unless and until there is a tendency of recurrence of the offence. In the instant case there is a solitary case to the credit of the petitioner, in which he has been granted anticipatory bail till the conclusion of trial, we find that this notice is nothing, but a sheer abuse of power vested in the executive authorities of the district”.

Advocate Akhilesh Srivastava appeared for the Petitioner whereas A.G.A. appeared for the Respondent.

The brief facts of the case were that the petitioner in this case seeks to challenge a show cause notice issued on June 15, 2023, by the Additional District Magistrate (Finance & Revenue), Aligarh, through a writ of Certiorari. The notice, linked to Case No. 3400 of 2023 (State Vs. Govardhan), is based on two incidents: firstly, Case Crime No. 69 of 2023 at Police Station Chharra, District Aligarh, involving various sections of the IPC, and secondly, Rapat No. 20 dated May 3, 2023. These incidents form the basis for the notice issued under Section 3 of the Uttar Pradesh Control of Goondas Act, 1970. The notice aims to add an extra offense under this Act to the petitioner's case, necessitating the individual's branding as a "Goonda" as per Section 2(b) of the Act. After considering the submission, the Bench found that the law allows for the expulsion of an individual labeled as a "Goonda" from the city's municipal limits as a preventive measure, achieved through an externment order from the district's executive authorities.

The Bench also noted that a single case should not label someone as a habitual offender, as provisions of the Act are applicable across Uttar Pradesh and aim to safeguard peace.

However, there is a concern about its misuse by executive authorities who issue notices on minor cases or beat reports, diminishing the law's impact, added the Bench.

The Bench went on to clarify that issuing notices without due assessment is problematic as it highlights the importance of the public's perception of an individual's image, reputation and trivial offenses should not brand someone a "Goonda."

“There is mandatory requirement of the law, that if the executive authority is satisfied that the proceedings under Goonda Act spells out offences under clause (a), (b) and (c) of sub-Section 1 of the Act, he may issue notices to the particular “Goonda” informing him general nature of material allegations against him in clause (d) of the Act, his image among the masses, his nuisance value by which he is a potential threat to the peace and public order of the society at large”, added the Bench.

However, the Bench found that in the instant case, the notice under challenge spells out the cases required against the petitioner which is allegedly issued on a "prescribed printed proforma" without application of mind by the executive authorities.

“Not only this, except enumeration of pending solitary case and a beat report, there is total lack of any judicial mind spelling out the general nature of material allegations against the petitioner, making entire impugned notice per se defective and cannot be acted upon any further”, added the Bench.

Hence, the Bench recorded strong displeasure in such type of routine pasting of such provisions of the Uttar Pradesh Control of Goondas Act, 1970 and Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 in a most capricious and casual way.

Accordingly, the Court allowed the Writ Petition.

Cause Title: Govardhan v State of U.P. [Neutral Citation No. 2023: AHC:169934-DB]

Click here to read/download the Order


Allahabad High CourtJustice Rahul ChaturvediJustice Mohd. Azhar Husain Idrisi

Pankaj Bajpai