Supreme Court Upholds Gangsters Act Charges in Property Dispute Murder Case

The case of Shraddha Gupta vs. The State of Uttar Pradesh concerns the application of the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 to a murder case arising from a family property dispute. The Supreme Court ruled that even a single FIR/charge sheet for an offense under Section 2(b) of the Gangsters Act can justify prosecution under the law.

Background of the Case

The appellant, Shraddha Gupta, along with her husband and co-accused, was implicated in the conspiracy to murder Sadhna Sharma, a government lawyer in Badaun, Uttar Pradesh. The case involved multiple accused, including Shraddha Gupta’s co-accused, who were earlier charged under the Gangsters Act. A supplementary charge sheet was later filed against the appellant, adding her to the case.

The case unfolded as follows:

The complainant, Viparna Gaur, alleged that her sister, Sadhna Sharma, was murdered due to a longstanding family property dispute.
The original FIR (Crime No. 337/2016) was registered under Sections 147, 304, 504, 323, 506, 120-B of IPC.
On May 23, 2016, Sadhna Sharma was returning home from court when her scooty was allegedly rammed by a car driven by the accused.
Witnesses claimed that the accused shouted, “Kill this fellow also, otherwise he may give evidence,” before fleeing.
The complainant later submitted call recordings that allegedly implicated Shraddha Gupta in the conspiracy.
A separate case under Sections 2/3 of the Gangsters Act was registered as Crime No. 268/2017.

Arguments of the Appellant (Shraddha Gupta)

The appellant argued that she was falsely implicated and was not named in the initial FIR.
Her name only surfaced later in a supplementary charge sheet under Section 173(8) Cr.P.C.
She contended that the Gangsters Act was wrongly applied to a single incident without habitual criminal activity.
She was a household lady with no history of criminal activity, and the inclusion under the Act was malicious.

Arguments of the Respondents (State of Uttar Pradesh)

The prosecution argued that Shraddha Gupta played an active role in the murder conspiracy.
Her call recordings revealed her involvement, leading to her name being added in the charge sheet.
The main accused, P.C. Sharma, was a known gang leader involved in multiple crimes.
Since the other accused were already charged under the Gangsters Act, the appellant was part of the gang under Section 2(b).

Supreme Court’s Ruling

The Supreme Court, comprising Justices M.R. Shah and B.V. Nagarathna, ruled against the appellant, allowing her prosecution under the Gangsters Act.

1. Single FIR Sufficient for Gangsters Act

The Court held that even a single FIR/charge sheet could justify prosecution under the Act if the accused was involved in anti-social activities.

“Even a single crime committed by a ‘Gang’ is sufficient to invoke the Gangsters Act. The definition does not require multiple offenses.”

2. Gang Membership Not Limited to Habitual Criminals

The Court noted that under the Act, a gang member need not have a record of multiple offenses but could still be prosecuted if involved in organized criminal activity.

3. Property Dispute as Motive for Murder

The Court accepted that the murder was orchestrated as part of a financially motivated conspiracy over family property.

4. Prior Gangsters Act Charges Against Co-Accused

The Court observed that since other accused in the case were already booked under the Gangsters Act, extending the charges to Shraddha Gupta was justified.

Final Judgment

The Supreme Court dismissed the appellant’s plea to quash proceedings under the Gangsters Act.
It ruled that a single offense can be sufficient to apply the Act.
The case was allowed to proceed under the Special Court for Gangsters Act offenses.

Impact of the Judgment

Reaffirms that even a single offense can justify prosecution under the Gangsters Act.
Clarifies the legal scope of gang-related crimes and organized criminal activities.
Strengthens the application of the Gangsters Act in financially motivated conspiracies.

Conclusion

The Supreme Court’s ruling in Shraddha Gupta vs. The State of Uttar Pradesh underscores the stringent application of the Gangsters Act to organized crimes. By upholding charges against the appellant, the Court has reinforced the importance of tackling criminal conspiracies linked to financial disputes.

Petitioner Name: Shraddha Gupta.
Respondent Name: The State of Uttar Pradesh.
Judgment By: Justice M.R. Shah, Justice B.V. Nagarathna.
Place Of Incident: Badaun, Uttar Pradesh.
Judgment Date: 26-04-2022.

Don’t miss out on the full details! Download the complete judgment in PDF format below and gain valuable insights instantly!

Download Judgment: shraddha-gupta-vs-the-state-of-uttar-p-supreme-court-of-india-judgment-dated-26-04-2022.pdf

Directly Download Judgment: Directly download this Judgment

See all petitions in Attempt to Murder Cases
See all petitions in Extortion and Blackmail
See all petitions in Judgment by Mukeshkumar Rasikbhai Shah
See all petitions in Judgment by B.V. Nagarathna
See all petitions in dismissed
See all petitions in supreme court of India judgments April 2022
See all petitions in 2022 judgments

See all posts in Criminal Cases Category
See all allowed petitions in Criminal Cases Category
See all Dismissed petitions in Criminal Cases Category
See all partially allowed petitions in Criminal Cases Category