State vs Durgpal Advocate - Girish Chandra Sharma — 600568/2008
Case under Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti-social Activities (Prevention) Act Section 2/3. Disposed: Contested--DECIDED on 05th May 2026.
G.S.T. - Gangaster Sessions Trial
CNR: UPET010003352008
Filing Number
600568/2008
Filing Date
17-12-2008
Registration No
600568/2008
Registration Date
17-12-2008
Court
District and Session Judge
Judge
4-Additional District And Sessions Judge, Court No. 03
Decision Date
05th May 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--DECIDED
FIR Details
FIR Number
270
Police Station
MIRHACHI
Year
2008
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
State
Adv. ADGC
Respondent(s)
Durgpal Advocate - Girish Chandra Sharma
Maanpal
Adv. Subodh Verma
Poos @ Punni
Adv. Subodh Verma
Hearing History
Judge: 4-Additional District And Sessions Judge, Court No. 03
Disposed
Judgement
Arguments
Defence Evidence
Defence Evidence
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 05-05-2026 | Disposed |
| 04-05-2026 | Judgement |
| 28-04-2026 | Arguments |
| 18-04-2026 | Defence Evidence |
| 10-04-2026 | Defence Evidence |
Final Orders / Judgements
Summary The Special Judge (Gangster Act) acquitted three accused—Durgpal, Manapal, and Purn (alias Punni)—of charges under Sections 2/3 of the U.P. Organised Crime Control Act, 1986. The court found that while the accused faced charges related to an organised criminal gang allegedly involved in extortion and violence, the prosecution failed to establish the requisite elements of the gangster law, particularly the acquisition of illegal assets and creation of terror/fear in society. Critically, the court noted that the accused had already been acquitted in the underlying criminal cases (murder, extortion charges) on which the gangster prosecution was based, making the current case untenable. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary The Special Judge (Gangster Act) acquitted three accused—Durgpal, Manapal, and Purn (alias Punni)—of charges under Sections 2/3 of the U.P. Organised Crime Control Act, 1986. The court found that while the accused faced charges related to an organised criminal gang allegedly involved in extortion and violence, the prosecution failed to establish the requisite elements of the gangster law, particularly the acquisition of illegal assets and creation of terror/fear in society. Critically, the court noted that the accused had already been acquitted in the underlying criminal cases (murder, extortion charges) on which the gangster prosecution was based, making the current case untenable. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts