Supreme Court Rules Solitary Communal Incident Insufficient for Gangsters Act
The Supreme Court has ruled that invoking the stringent Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act for a solitary incident of communal disturbance, triggered by a social media post, constitutes misuse of the law. The judgment clarified that the Act is designed to counter organised crime, not isolated events. This decision has significant implications for the application of such stringent penal laws by state authorities.
Unpacked:
The UP Gangsters Act is intended to combat organized crime by targeting individuals or groups involved in continuous, coordinated criminal activity. It is not meant for isolated incidents or minor offenses, but rather for situations where there is credible evidence of gang membership and a pattern of organized criminal conduct.
The Supreme Court found that invoking the Act for a single communal disturbance, without evidence of organized or ongoing criminal activity, did not meet the legal threshold. The Court emphasized that extraordinary penal laws require credible evidence of gang activity, not just isolated incidents or accusations.
The ruling signals that authorities must rigorously assess the gravity and nature of offenses before applying stringent laws like the UP Gangsters Act. It warns against using such laws arbitrarily or as tools of harassment, reinforcing the need for fair, just, and reasonable procedures in criminal prosecution.
Yes, previous guidelines and legal precedents, such as those issued after the Gorakh Nath Mishra case, require strict verification of criminal antecedents and organizational roles before invoking the Act. These were not followed in this instance, leading the Court to quash the FIR and emphasize adherence to established procedures.