LexStreakRead free →
Supreme Court of India· 17 August 2026

How does Section 346 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 bear on the interpretation of Section 12 of the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986?

KESHVENDRA SINGH v. SHANKAR SINGH AND ANR
2026 INSC 866 · SLP (Crl.) No. 2815 of 2026
Coram: K. V. Viswanathan; Arun Palli
🔖 Save this judgment🔔 Follow Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti…📬 Get today's judgments
View the original judgment PDFFree to read. To download it — or the LexStreak typeset copy with the headnote and Points of Law — create an account; downloads are part of the Pro plan.
Answer

Harmoniously reading Section 12 of the Gangsters Act with Section 346 of the BNSS, which mandates that proceedings continue from day-to-day until all witnesses in attendance are examined, the conclusion is irresistible that Section 12 contemplates precedence for the Gangsters Act trial only in the event of a clash of dates.

Headnote

Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 — Section 12 — Article 21 — speedy trial — clash of dates — Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — Section 346 — Section 12 — Gangsters Act — clash of dates — Held: Section 12 of the Gangsters Act does not freeze proceedings in other cases against the accused until the Gangsters Act trial concludes; its purpose is only to indicate that, in the event of a clash of dates, the proceedings under the Gangsters Act were to get priority. (¶19) Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — Section 346 — day-to-day trial — Held further: Read harmoniously with Section 346 of the BNSS, which mandates that proceedings continue from day-to-day until all witnesses in attendance are examined, Section 12 of the Gangsters Act contemplates precedence only where dates actually clash. (¶22) Article 21 — victim's right to speedy trial — Held further: The right to speedy trial under Article 21 of the Constitution of India is not only the prerogative of the accused but is also a valuable right of the victim, and an interpretation of Section 12 that freezes other trials would render it ultra vires Article 21. (¶23) no clash of dates — appeal allowed — Held further: Since the Gangsters Act trial had not even begun while the sessions trial for murder was on the verge of conclusion, there was no clash of dates warranting abeyance; the impugned order was set aside and the appeal allowed. (¶25, ¶27)

In the Court's own words
Paragraph 22Section 346 of the BNSS mandates to continue proceedings from day-to-day basis until all witnesses in attendance are examined, unless the court finds the adjournment of the same beyond the following day to be necessary for reasons to be recorded. Moreover, stringent conditions are imposed for adjournment of proceedings. Harmoniously reading Section 12 of the Gangsters Act with Section 346 of the BNSS (Section 309 of the Code), the conclusion is irresistible that all that Section 12 of the Gangsters Act contemplates is that, in the event of a clash of dates, the proceedings under the Gangsters Act would be given preference. ‘VICTIM’ HAS A RIGHT TO SPEEDY TRIAL TOO: -
Acts & Sections
Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023Constitution of IndiaIndian Penal Code, 1860Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973

One judgment a day. That's the whole habit.

Read the full text of KESHVENDRA SINGH v. SHANKAR SINGH AND ANR — and get the Supreme Court's output as a five-minute daily read, with plain-language headnotes and the questions each judgment settles.

Create my free account

Free forever plan · 30 seconds · data stays in India

Open the full judgment →

Also decided in this judgment
Does Section 12 of the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 require that all other proceedings against the accused be kept in abeyance until the trial under the Act is concluded?Under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, is the right to a speedy trial available only to the accused, or also to the victim?Where the trial under the Gangsters Act had not even begun while the ordinary sessions trial for murder had nearly concluded, was there a clash of dates justifying keeping the sessions trial in abeyance under Section 12 of the Gangsters Act?
Plain-language answer prepared by the LexStreak Editorial Desk — verify against the judgment. Source: Supreme Court of India. Corrections