The Uttar Pradesh government is “persistently” using the UP Control of Goondas Act, 1970 as a tool of oppression despite repeated warnings from courts against its misuse, the Allahabad High Court has observed.
The court made the remarks while quashing an order passed by the Gonda District Magistrate declaring Zahid Ali a ‘Goonda’ and ordering his externment from the district for six months.
Justice Subhash Vidyarthi said the Goondas Act is a powerful law meant to control habitual offenders and must be used sparingly, only in clear cases involving public disorder or threats to public order.
Courts have repeatedly warned the state against using the law to oppress innocent people, the court said, adding that the legislation cannot be used to punish a person without their conviction for a substantial offence.
“Numerous cases are being presented before this Court, indicating that the State is persistent in its approach of using the Goonda Act as a tool of oppression,” the court said, calling Ali’s case a “glaring example” of the abuse of the law.
The proceedings against Ali were based on two criminal cases cited by the police. However, he had already been acquitted in one of them.
The High Court held that a person’s involvement in a criminal case cannot be used to declare them a ‘Goonda’ after their acquittal. It also noted that there was no allegation that Ali posed a threat to the maintenance of law and order.
Ali had not informed the District Magistrate about his acquittal during the proceedings. The court therefore said the District Magistrate could not be faulted for not considering a fact that had not been placed before him.
However, the court questioned the police’s role, observing that they must have been aware of Ali’s acquittal. Despite this, the acquitted case was mentioned in the proceedings, which the court said appeared to have been done deliberately to present a false picture of Ali before the District Magistrate.
Ali later raised the issue in his appeal before the Commissioner of Devi Patan Mandal, but the Commissioner failed to properly consider the grounds and upheld the District Magistrate’s order, the court said.
The High Court further held that Ali’s involvement in a single criminal case registered in 2020 did not establish that he was a habitual offender, as required for action under the Goondas Act.
It also pointed to the six-year gap between the alleged incident in 2020 and the 2026 order declaring Ali a ‘Goonda’.
“There is no reasonable nexus between registration of a criminal case in the year 2020 and declaration of the petitioner as a goonda in the year 2026,” the court said.
The High Court consequently quashed the orders passed by the Gonda District Magistrate and the Commissioner, Devi Patan Mandal.
Advocate Kunwar Bahadur Singh appeared for Ali, while Additional Government Advocate Ravi Srivastava represented the Uttar Pradesh government.
