The Allahabad High Court has observed that the Uttar Pradesh government is continuously using the UP Control of Goondas Act, 1970 as a tool of oppression despite repeated judicial warnings against such misuse. The observation was made by Justice Subhash Vidyarthi while setting aside an order passed by the District Magistrate of Gonda declaring Zahid Ali a ‘Goonda’ and directing his externment from the district for six months.
The Court noted that the Goonda Act is a powerful legal provision intended for the control and suppression of individuals involved in organised crime or public disorder, and must be invoked only in clear cases involving a threat to public order. It emphasised that the law is not meant to secure punishment without conviction for a substantial offence and has repeatedly cautioned the State against using it to target innocent persons.
However, the Bench stated that numerous cases presented before it indicate a persistent approach by the State to misuse the Act, with the present case being a glaring example of such abuse. The Court found that the police had relied on two criminal cases to justify Ali’s declaration as a Goonda. In one of these cases, Ali had already been acquitted, and the Court held that involvement in a case resulting in acquittal cannot form the basis for declaring a person a Goonda under the Act.
The Court further observed that there was no allegation that Zahid Ali posed a threat to the maintenance of law and order. While it acknowledged that Ali had not raised his acquittal before the District Magistrate, which meant the officer could not be faulted for overlooking it, the Court held that the police must have been aware of the acquittal. It concluded that the mention of the acquitted case was deliberately made to create a false impression of Ali before the District Magistrate.
The Bench also noted that although Ali brought up his acquittal during the appeal before the Commissioner of Devi Patan Mandal, the appellate authority failed to apply its mind to the grounds raised by him and simply confirmed the District Magistrate’s order.
Ultimately, the Court held that Ali’s involvement in a single criminal case registered in 2020 did not establish that he habitually commits, attempts to commit, or abets the commission of offences, which is a prerequisite for declaration as a Goonda under the Act. It highlighted the long time gap between the 2020 case and the 2026 externment order, stating there was no reasonable nexus between the two to justify such action.
Accordingly, the Allahabad High Court quashed the orders passed by the District Magistrate of Gonda and the Commissioner of Devi Patan Mandal against Zahid Ali. Advocate Kunwar Bahadur Singh represented the petitioner, while Additional Government Advocate Ravi Srivastava appeared for the State.