Supreme Court: UP Gangsters Act Cannot Be Misused as a Tool for Harassment

The Supreme Court has issued a strong caution against the misuse of stringent special laws like the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986. Emphasising the importance of protecting individual liberty, the Court said that laws of such extraordinary nature should be applied with restraint and should not be misused to target individuals arbitrarily or for political motives.

"When stringent provisions under special statutes like the UP Gangsters Act are invoked, the constitutional right to personal liberty becomes even more crucial," the Court stated. "The powers granted to the State under such legislation must not be used to intimidate or harass citizens, especially when political undercurrents are suspected."

The bench, comprising Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Sandeep Mehta, made these observations while quashing an FIR registered on 30th April 2023 against the appellants under the Gangsters Act. The FIR was linked to an incident from 10th October 2022, but was lodged only after the daughter-in-law of Appellant No. 1 filed her nomination for the Chairperson post of the Nagar Panchayat Khargupur on 17th April 2023.

No Evidence of Habitual Criminal Behaviour

The Court expressed concern about the suspicious timing of the FIR and the lack of credible evidence demonstrating that the appellants were involved in any ongoing organised criminal activity. It referred to an earlier FIR under the IPC but found no proof of continuous criminal behaviour that would justify invoking the Gangsters Act.

Reiterating a key principle, the Court held that mere involvement in a single instance of a mob clash is insufficient to attract the provisions of the Gangsters Act. Without evidence showing a pattern of habitual criminal conduct or organised activity, such legislation cannot be legitimately applied.

"Given the severe implications of this law, depriving a person of life or liberty can only be justified when the process is lawful, just, and fair," the judgment reads.

Upholding Article 21: Due Process Must Be Fair

The Court reinforced the need for fairness under Article 21 of the Constitution, which protects the right to life and personal liberty. It clarified that any law depriving someone of liberty must follow a procedure that is not arbitrary or oppressive.

"It is settled law that procedures affecting life and liberty must not only be legally prescribed but must also be just, fair, and reasonable. Laws that abridge fundamental rights must be backed by robust and credible evidence," the bench held.

The Court emphasised that exceptional criminal laws like the Gangsters Act, which bypass normal procedural safeguards, must be supported by substantial and verifiable evidence, not mere speculation or vague claims.

UP Government’s Guidelines Ignored

Importantly, the Supreme Court noted that the authorities had failed to follow the procedural safeguards laid down in the Gorakh Nath Misra v. State of UP case. The guidelines from that judgment require a detailed evaluation of the seriousness of the offences involved, the criminal history of the accused, and a proper verification process before invoking the Gangsters Act.

In the current case, none of these criteria were fulfilled. The state failed to establish any pattern of recurring criminal conduct or produce concrete evidence justifying the application of the Act.

Case Title: Lal Mohd. & Anr. v. State of U.P. & Ors.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 685