The court affirmed the validity of property attachment under the U.A.P.A., confirming jurisdiction and procedural adherence despite contestation of unlawful association status.

ORDER :

G.K. ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.

This Writ Petition has been filed challenging the order dated 19.02.2025 passed in O.P. No. 126 of 2023 on the file of the learned Principal District Judge, Theni District, thereby confirming the order passed by the fourth respondent dated 30.09.2022, under Sections 7 and 8 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (hereinafter referred to as the 'U.A.P.A'), and attaching the immovable property of the petitioners.

2.The first petitioner is the Tamil Nadu Development Foundation Trust, registered vide Document No. 837 of 1993, dated 19.08.1993, and the second petitioner is an independent body established by the first petitioner to execute its objectives.

3.While being so, the third respondent registered the F.I.R. in R.C.No.42/2022/NIA/DLI, dated 19.09.2022, for the offences punishable under Sections 120-B , 153A, 153AA of the I.P.C and Sections 13, 17, 18, 18B, 38, and 39 of the U.A.P.A, against the accused persons, who are alleged to be the office bearers and members of the Popular Front of India (in short hereinafter referred to as 'PFI'). The allegations state that they committed criminal conspiracy, planned unlawful activities, and caused disharmony and ill will between members of different religions. Further, the PFI and its office bearers operated a clandestine network of motivated youths to identify vulnerable non-Muslims, using the petitioners and Darul Hikma, located in Theni and Tirunelveli Districts, respectively.

4.Therefore, the property belonging to the first petitioner, situated at Door No. 6-8-12, Muthuthevanpatti, Theni Taluk, Theni District, was attached by the fourth respondent through proceedings dated 30.09.2022. Prior to the attachment, the first respondent issued a notification dated 27.09.2022 in exercise of the powers conferred by Section 3 (1) of the U.A.P.A, declaring the PFI and its associates, affiliates, or fronts as an unlawful association with immediate effect for a period of five years from the date of the said publication. The notification was published by the second respondent in the Government Gazette, dated 28.09.2022. The first respondent also issued a notification dated 27.09.2022 in exercise of the powers conferred under Section 42 of the U.A.P.A and directed that all powers exercisable by it under Sections 7 and 8 of the U.A.P.A, in relation to the unlawful association, shall also be exercised by the State Government and Union Territory Administration. Thereafter, the fourth respondent, by order dated 30.09.2022, ordered the attachment of their office premises on the pretext of labelling it as one of the PFI offices. This was challenged before the District Court in O.P. No. 126 of 2022, and the same was dismissed, confirming the order of attachment by an order dated 19.02.2025. Aggrieved by the same, the present Writ Petition has been filed.

5.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that, simultaneously, the third respondent also passed an order under Section 25 of the U.A.P.A, thereby forfeiting the subject property on the grounds that the petitioners intended to use it for terrorism. This was challenged by way of an appeal, and it is pending.

6.He further submitted that, in order to pass an order under Section 8 (4) of the U.A.P.A, the so-called unlawful association must first be declared as unlawful by a notification under Section 3 (1) of the U.A.P.A by the Central Government in the Official Gazette. Only after such a notification can an order be passed under (4) of the U.A.P.A. However, the first respondent did not issue any notification declaring that the petitioners are an unlawful association.

7.Though the first respond