NA528/39224/2026 of ANUGAR KUMAR @ ANURAG DUBEY @ DABBAN Vs STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER on 15 September 2026

1. Heard Shri Shailendra Kumar Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Anoop Trivedi, learned Additional Advocate General, assisted by Shri Sanjay Kumar Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material brought on record.

2. The present application under Section 528 BNSS has been filed for setting aside of the order dated 04.08.2026 passed by learned Special Judge, Gangster Act/ Additional Session Judge, Court No. 07, Farrukhabad in Case No. 1142 of 2026, arising out of Case Crime No. 63 of 2026, under Section 3(1) of U.P. Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, Police Station Maudarwaja, District Farrukhabad.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant contends that applicant is the applicants' three mobile phones have been seized by the police. The said mobile phones have been falsely implicated in the aforesaid case. He further submits that no useful purpose would be served in keeping the mobile phones of the applicant at the police station which would result in becoming junk. Learned counsel for the applicant has relied upon a decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in the matter of Sunder Bhai Ambalal Desai Vs. State of Gujarat 2003 (46) A.C.C. 223 in support of his contention, in which it has been held that it is not desirable in the matter of motor vehicle, the vehicle be kept at the police station for a long time which result in the vehicle becoming junk, therefore, the said mobile phones should be released in favour of the registered owner on such terms and conditions as the court below may deem fit and proper. Learned counsel for the applicant has also placed reliance upon the decision of this Court reported in 2012 (77) ACC 381 Shyam Singh Kushwaha Vs. State of U.P. and another, in support of his contention.

4. Learned Additional Advocate General submits that earlier when the applicant was asked to open the passwords of the mobile phones, he replied that he has forgotten the same, therefore, necessary datas could Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Shailendra Kumar Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Anugar Kumar @ Anurag Dubey @ Dabban .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. And Another .....Opposite Party(s)

not be collected from his mobile phones.

5. In reply thereto, the learned counsel for the applicant submits that as applicant has forgotten the passwords of said seized mobile phones, the prosecution may contact company of mobile phones for breaking the their passwords.

6. After hearing the learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.A.G., and after perusing the order impugned as well as averments made in the present application, this Court is of the opinion, that the arguments as raised by learned counsel for the applicant has substance.

7. Accordingly, the order dated 04.08.2026 passed by learned Special Judge, Gangster Act/ Additional Session Judge, Court No. 07, Farrukhabad in the aforementioned case, is hereby set aside with the liberty to the applicant to file an appropriate application along with all relevant documents showing the ownership of the vehicle, before the concerned Court below and if such an application is filed within one month from today, the same shall be considered and disposed of as expeditiously as possible, in accordance with law, preferably within a period of one month, thereafter. However, it is also open for the prosecution to approach the respective companies of these seized mobile phones for opening of their locks and for collecting datas as required by the prosecution.

8. With the aforesaid directions, this application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is finally disposed off. September 16, 2026 Mustaqeem. NA528 No. 39224 of 2026 2 (Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J.) Digitally signed by :- MOHD MUSTAQEEM KHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad