The court emphasized the importance of providing an opportunity for the petitioner to prove his non-involvement despite the typographical error in the reference of the plot number.

JUDGMENT

Sujit Narayan Prasad, J. - Instant writ petition has been preferred under Article 226 of Constitution of India for issuance of writ of certiorari by quashing the notice/order dated 15.10.2018 whereby and whereunder in exercise of power conferred under Article 24-A and 25 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (hereinafter referred to as "of the Act, 1967" for short) petitioner has been directed to vacate the premises and also to seal it without providing an opportunity of hearing.

2. Brief facts of the case, as per the pleadings made in the writ petition, are that petitioner has purchased a piece of land along with construction over the area measuring 3 katha and some chattaks under Jamabandi No.52 in Mouza Makatpur, Thana No.95, holding No.193 under Ward No.1 (old) and Ward No.9(new) within the Giridih Municipality from one Sushma Singh by way of registered sale deed dated 18th June, 2011 and is in peaceful possession over the same

3. Respondents have issued a notice/order served on the petitioner on 15.10.2018 issued in exercise of power conferred under the provision of Section 24-A and 25 of the Act, 1967 directing the petitioner to vacate the premises on the alleged ground that the said property belongs to one Manoj Choudhary. The grievance of the petitioner is that aforesaid exercise has been done by virtue of decision taken by the Director General of Police and Inspector General of Police, Jharkhand, Ranchi wherein reference of plot number has been made as 153-B while the petitioner residence is situated over plot No.193-B and therefore initiation of proceeding under the aforesaid provision of law is improper and since foundation itself is wrong, its consequence cannot be said to be perfect.

4. The State-respondent has filed affidavit wherein, inter-alia, it has been stated that there is some typographical error in making reference of the number of plot. Actually petitioner resides in plot No.193 but due to inadvertence and bonafide mistake it has been referred as 153 but actually the petitioner has been directed to vacate the premises situated over plot No.193 and that has also been sealed.

5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and on appreciation of the rival submissions, it is evident from the material available on record that the Central Government has come up with an enactment in the name of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 with an object to prevent the terrorist activities. The said statute contains provision of punishment for unlawful activities (Section 13) and the forfeiture of proceeds of terrorism as per the provision made under Section 24-A and 25 contained under Chapter-V of the Act, 1967. For better appreciation the provision of Section 24-A and 25 are being reflected hereinbelow:

"24-A. Forfeiture of proceeds of terrorism.- (1) No person shall hold or be in possession of any proceeds of terrorism.

(2) Proceeds of terrorism, whether held by a terrorist organization or terrorist gang or by any other person and whether or not such terrorist or other person is prosecuted or convicted for any offence under Chapter IV or Chapter VI, shall be liable to be forfeited to the Central Government or the State Government, as the case may be, in the manner provided under this Chapter.

(3) Where proceedings have been commenced under this section, the Court may pass an order directing attachment or forfeiture, as the case may be, of property equivalent to, or, the value of the proceeds of terrorism involved in the offence.

25. Powers of investigating officer and Designated Authority and appeal against order of Designated Authority.-

(1) If an officer investigating an offence committed under Chapter IV or Chapter VI, has reason to believe that any property in relation to which an investigation is being conducted, represents proceeds of terrorism, he shall, with the prior approval in writing of the Director General of Police of the State in which such property is situated, make an o