Allahabad High Court Refuses to Quash Gangsters Act Case Against Ex-SP MLA Irfan Solanki

The Allahabad High Court has refused to interfere in criminal proceedings initiated against former Samajwadi Party MLA Irfan Solanki under the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, noting that the trial in the case had already reached an advanced stage with witnesses being examined.

A single judge bench of Justice Samit Gopal dismissed Solanki’s petition filed under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, which corresponds to the inherent powers earlier exercised under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Court held that once charges have been framed and trial has commenced, the accused cannot seek quashing of proceedings except in the rarest of cases.

Solanki had approached the court challenging the entire criminal proceedings arising out of a 2022 case, registered at Jajmau police station in Kanpur Nagar under Section 3(1) of the Gangsters Act. He also sought quashing of the charge sheet dated June 27, 2023, the summoning order dated July 21, 2023, the order rejecting his discharge application, and the subsequent order framing charges against him.

In the same case, in September last year, the high court had granted Solanki bail. 

According to the prosecution, Solanki was identified as the leader of an inter-district gang allegedly involved in land grabbing, arson, extortion, intimidation and cheating for financial gain. The gangsters case was built primarily on an earlier FIR relating to an alleged incident of arson and criminal intimidation over a plot in Defence Colony, Kanpur Nagar, in November 2022. A gang chart was prepared by the police in December 2022 and approved by senior police authorities, including the Commissioner of Police, Kanpur Nagar.

Solanki, who represented the Sisamau constituency as an MLA before his conviction in the arson case, argued that the gangsters case was a result of political vendetta and that the police had mechanically approved the gang chart in violation of the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Rules, 2021.

The State opposed the plea, arguing that the petition was filed at a highly belated stage when the trial had already begun. It was pointed out that the testimony of one prosecution witness had been completed and another witness was under cross-examination. The State also maintained that the gang chart had been duly approved with recorded satisfaction by the competent authority and that allegations of political rivalry could not be a ground for quashing criminal proceedings.

Agreeing with the State, the high court noted that the stage of trial was undisputed and that after rejection of the discharge application and framing of charges, the accused could only seek acquittal based on evidence, not quashing of proceedings. Court relied on settled Supreme Court precedents, including Priti Saraf v. State (NCT of Delhi) (2021) and Arnab Manoranjan Goswami v. State of Maharashtra (2020), to hold that inherent powers to quash criminal proceedings must be exercised sparingly and only in exceptional cases.

The bench also rejected Solanki’s argument regarding procedural lapses in approval of the gang chart, observing that the Commissioner of Police had independently recorded his satisfaction while granting approval. On the plea of political vendetta, the court reiterated that criminal proceedings cannot be quashed merely because the accused alleges political rivalry, as the truth or falsity of such claims must be tested during trial.

Holding that the material on record did not satisfy the strict conditions laid down by the Supreme Court for quashing criminal proceedings, the High Court dismissed the petition and allowed the trial to proceed.

Case Title: Irfan Solanki vs. State of U.P. and another

Judgment Date: January 30, 2026

Bench: Justice Samit Gopal