U.P. Goondas Act| Appellate Authority Has No Power To Remand Case To District Magistrate: Allahabad High Court
The Court said that it is "beyond comprehension" why state considered only 2 then 4 cases out of accused's 19 pending cases for externment proceedings.
Justice Sandeep Jain, Allahabad High Court
The Allahabad High Court has held that the appellate authority under Section 6 of the U.P. Control of Goondas Act, 1970 possesses no jurisdiction to remand a matter back to the District Magistrate for fresh adjudication, since the provision confines the Commissioner's power strictly to confirming the order, with or without modification, or setting it aside.
The Court found that the Commissioner, Aligarh Division, had exceeded his statutory jurisdiction by remanding the case despite no such power being vested in him under the Act.
The Court held that the State cannot sustain an externment order by initiating successive proceedings based on selectively chosen criminal cases despite knowing the accused's full criminal history.
Justice Sandeep Jain observed, “…Section 6 of the Act, 1970 only vests the appellate authority the jurisdiction to either confirm the order, with or without modification, or to set it aside but the appellate authority cannot remand the matter back to the District Magistrate for deciding it afresh on merits under Section 3/4 of the Act, 1970”.
“…The appellate authority has deemed appropriate to quash the impugned order of District Magistrate dated 01.11.2025, which is perfectly legal. It is beyond comprehension, if the petitioner was having a criminal history of 19 cases way back in the year 2021 why only 2 and 4 cases were considered for initiating proceedings under the Act, 1970 against the petitioner. Nothing had stopped the State from proceeding against the petitioner by taking all the above 19 cases into consideration, but the State has not chosen to do so”, the Bench noted further.
Advocate Manish Kumar appeared for the petitioner.
In the matter, proceedings under Section 3/4 of the U.P. Control of Goondas Act, 1970 were first initiated against the petitioner, Anil Kumar, in 2024 based on two criminal cases, despite a report of the District Crime Records Bureau (DCRB), Aligarh, dated March 05, 2024, showing 19 pending criminal cases against him up to 2021.
The Additional District Magistrate (Administration), Aligarh, by order dated September 25, 2024, concluded the petitioner did not fall within the definition of "Goonda" and closed the proceedings; this order was not appealed by the State.
Roughly three months later, on December 17, 2024, fresh proceedings were initiated against the petitioner based on four different criminal cases from the same 2021 batch, culminating in an externment order dated November 01, 2025 banishing him from Aligarh district for six months.
The petitioner challenged the externment order before the Commissioner, Aligarh Division, under Section 6 of the Act. The Commissioner, by order dated December 17, 2025, partly allowed the appeal, holding that the District Magistrate had passed contradictory orders on the basis of the same set of criminal antecedents, set aside the externment order, but remanded the matter back to the District Magistrate for fresh adjudication after hearing the parties.
The petitioner challenged the remand portion of this order before the High Court under Article 226.
Accordingly, considering the relevant provisions under the Act, the writ petition was allowed. The portion of the Commissioner's order remanding the matter to the District Magistrate was set aside, while the portion setting aside the District Magistrate's externment order dated November 01, 2025 was upheld.
Cause Title: Anil Chaudhary v. State of Uttar Pradesh and 3 Others (Neutral Citation: 2026:AHC:134574)
Appearances:
Petitioner: Manish Kumar and Shivendra Raj Singhal, Advocates.
Respondents: Government Advocate.