<p> Prayagraj (UP): The Allahabad High Court has dismissed a petition filed by Ajai Rai, Congress candidate in Varanasi Lok Sabha seat, challenging criminal proceedings against him in a trial court in Varanasi under a Gangsters Act case registered in 2010.</p>.<p> Rejecting the plea by Rai and four others, Justice Sanjay Kumar Singh observed that the trial is at an advanced stage.</p>.<p> The offence punishable under the Gangsters Act is an independent offence and it was not imposed at the instance of the complainant but it has been imposed by the state government to achieve the aim and object of the said Act, the HC said.</p>.Lok Sabha Polls 2024 | Face-off: Narendra Modi vs Ajay Rai.<p> The FIR in this case was registered on March 26, 2010, by one Bhanu Pratap Singh at police station Chetganj, Varanasi.</p>.<p> During the court proceedings, counsel for the petitioners had pleaded that the applicants and complainant 'entered a compromise' on September 28, 2023, and urged that the HC quash the trial court proceedings under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC).</p>.<p> A high court's interference under Section 482 CrPC is to prevent the abuse of process of any court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice.</p>.<p>"So far as the alleged compromise between the applicants and complainant for the offence under UP Gangster and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, it is a special Act," the court observed and refused to interfere in the trial court proceedings.</p>.<p> The counsel for the state government opposed the petition on the grounds that the trial was at a very advanced stage.</p>.<p> The counsel noted that the accused are facing trial under Section 7 Criminal Law (Amendment) Act and under Section 3(1) of the UP Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act 'which are non-compoundable offences'. Therefore, no compromise can be made for these offences.</p>.<p> He also pointed out that the first applicant Ajay Rai, who is an ex-MLA, has a long criminal history of 27 cases including the present case. </p>
<p> Prayagraj (UP): The Allahabad High Court has dismissed a petition filed by Ajai Rai, Congress candidate in Varanasi Lok Sabha seat, challenging criminal proceedings against him in a trial court in Varanasi under a Gangsters Act case registered in 2010.</p>.<p> Rejecting the plea by Rai and four others, Justice Sanjay Kumar Singh observed that the trial is at an advanced stage.</p>.<p> The offence punishable under the Gangsters Act is an independent offence and it was not imposed at the instance of the complainant but it has been imposed by the state government to achieve the aim and object of the said Act, the HC said.</p>.Lok Sabha Polls 2024 | Face-off: Narendra Modi vs Ajay Rai.<p> The FIR in this case was registered on March 26, 2010, by one Bhanu Pratap Singh at police station Chetganj, Varanasi.</p>.<p> During the court proceedings, counsel for the petitioners had pleaded that the applicants and complainant 'entered a compromise' on September 28, 2023, and urged that the HC quash the trial court proceedings under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC).</p>.<p> A high court's interference under Section 482 CrPC is to prevent the abuse of process of any court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice.</p>.<p>"So far as the alleged compromise between the applicants and complainant for the offence under UP Gangster and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, it is a special Act," the court observed and refused to interfere in the trial court proceedings.</p>.<p> The counsel for the state government opposed the petition on the grounds that the trial was at a very advanced stage.</p>.<p> The counsel noted that the accused are facing trial under Section 7 Criminal Law (Amendment) Act and under Section 3(1) of the UP Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act 'which are non-compoundable offences'. Therefore, no compromise can be made for these offences.</p>.<p> He also pointed out that the first applicant Ajay Rai, who is an ex-MLA, has a long criminal history of 27 cases including the present case. </p>