Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2020 DIGILAW 1024 (ALL)

Krishna Pal Yadav v. State of U. P.

2020-07-10

DEEPAK VERMA, PANKAJ NAQVI

body2020
JUDGMENT : 1. Heard Sri. Pranvesh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri. A. K. Sand assisted by Sri. Deepak Mishra, learned A.G.A. 2. This petition is directed against the order dated 16.03.2020 passed by respondent No. 2 the D.M. Ghaziabad whereby the properties of the petitioner have been attached under Section 14 of the U.P. Gangster Anti-social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 (in short the “Act”). 3. Sri. A.K. Sand, the learned AGA raised a preliminary objection that as under the order impugned, matter has been referred to Special Court under Section 16 of the Act, the petitioner may ventilate his grievance before the reference court. 4. Per contra, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that considering the scheme of the Act and in particular the language of Sections 14 and 15 of the Act, the petitioner has been deprived of his right to claim release of the attached property as provided under sub Section 1 of Section 15 of the Act. 5. To appreciate the interplay of Sections 14 and 15 of the Act, it would be opposite to extract Sections 14 and 15. Sections 14 and 15 of the Act are quoted hereunder: “14. Attachment of property - (1) If the District Magistrate has reason to believe that any property, whether moveable or immovable, in possession of any person has been acquired by a gangster as a result of the commission of an offence triable under this Act, he may order attachment of such property whether or not cognizance of such offence has been taken by any Court. (2) The provisions of the Code shall, mutatis mutandis apply to every such attachment. (3) Notwithstanding the provisions of the Code the District Magistrate may appoint an Administrator of any property attached under sub-section (1) and the Administrator shall have all the powers to administer such property in the best interest thereof. (4) The District Magistrate may provide police help to the Administrator for proper and effective administration of such property. 15. Release of property - (1) Where any property is attached under Section 14, the claimant thereof may within three months from the date of knowledge of such attachment make a representation to the District Magistrate showing the circumstances in and the sources by which such property was acquired by him. 15. Release of property - (1) Where any property is attached under Section 14, the claimant thereof may within three months from the date of knowledge of such attachment make a representation to the District Magistrate showing the circumstances in and the sources by which such property was acquired by him. (2) If the District Magistrate is satisfied about the genuineness of the claim made under sub-section (1) he shall forthwith release the property from attachment and thereupon such property shall be made over to the claimant.” 6. A perusal of Section 14 of the Act envisages that it confers power upon the D.M. to attach any property of a Gangster if he has reasons to believe that such acquisition is an outcome of the proceeds of commission of an offence. Section 15 confers a right upon a claimant to prefer a representation for release of the attached property within three months from the date of the knowledge of such attachment. If the D.M. finds that the claimant is able to establish that the property so acquired was not acquired through unlawful means, he is obliged to pass an order of release. 7. We find that the petitioner was put to a show cause on 28.04.2015 by respondent No. 2 the D.M. under Section 14(1) of the Act against the proposed attachment. The petitioner appeared and filed written objections on 05.06.2015, supported with an affidavit. Respondent No. 2 the D.M. after hearing the parties concerned including the petitioner passed a conjoint order of attachment and reference. 8. Once the petitioner has been heard on the proposed attachment and claim rejected, he cannot claim a fresh opportunity under Section 15(1) of the Act as that right has already been availed by the petitioner by filing his objections before the D.M. The right to claim relief under Section 15(1) of the Act is available to a claimant who has not been given a right to file his representation at the stage of Section 14 of the Act. 9. The petitioner will have all the opportunity to ventilate his grievance before the reference court. 10. The order dated 16.03.2020 does not suffer from any patent illegality. 11. The writ petition lacks merit and is dismissed.