Hon’ble Akhtar Husain Khan, J.—Present appeal has been filed by State of U.P. under Section 18 of the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 against judgement and order dated 23.7.2010 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 6/Special Judge Gangster Act, Allahabad in Miscellaneous Case No. 5 of 2009 (Nasim Khan v. State of U.P.), Miscellaneous Case No. 3 of 2009 (Abdul Nafis v. State of U.P.), Miscellaneous Case No. 4 of 2009 (Sayeed Khan and another v. State of U.P.), Miscellaneous Case No. 2 of 2009 (Nizam v. State of U.P.) and Miscellaneous Case No. 6 of 2009 (Salim Khan v. State of U.P.) arising out of Crime No. 254 of 2007, under Section 2/3 of the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, Police Station Handia, District Allahabad whereby Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 6/Special Judge Gangster Act, Allahabad has allowed applications under Section 16 of the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 moved in aforesaid each miscellaneous case and has set aside order dated 30.1.2009 passed by District Magistrate, Allahabad under Section 14(1) of Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986.

Affidavits have already been exchanged between the parties.

2. Shri Narendra Dev Roy, learned A.G.A. appeared for State of U.P. Shri Daya Shankar Mishra as well as Shri Mukhtar Alam appeared for respondents.

3. I have heard learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for respondents and perused the record.

4. Learned A.G.A. contended that impugned judgement and order passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 6/Special Judge Gangster Act, Allahabad is against provisions of the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 as well as evidence on record.

5. Learned A.G.A. contended that impugned judgement and order dated 23.7.2010 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 6/Special Judge Gangster Act, Allahabad should be set aside and impugned order 30.1.2009 passed by District Magistrate, Allahabad should be restored.

6. Learned counsel for respondents contended that impugned order has been passed under Section 17 of the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 (hereinafter referred to as “Act”) and there is no provision of appeal against order passed under Section 17 of Act either in the Act or in Chapter XXIX of Criminal Procedure Code which has been made applicable on appeals against judgement and order passed under the Act per Section 18 of the Act.

7. Learned counsel for respondents further contended that learned trial Court has passed impugned judgement and order after having considered all evidence and submissions made by the parties. The impugned judgement and order passed by trial Court is in accordance with provisions of the Act as well as evidence on record.

8. Learned counsel for respondents contended that appeal has no merit and it should be dismissed.

9. In reply learned A.G.A. contended that appeal is maintainable against impugned judgement and order in view of Section 18 of the Act.

10. Learned A.G.A. placed reliance upon judgement of Division Bench of this High Court rendered in the case of Manzoora v. State of U.P. through Secretary Home, Government of U.P., Lucknow and others, 2008(63) ACC 687.

11. In view of contentions made by the parties following points for determination arise in this appeal:

1. Whether appeal filed by State of U.P. is maintainable in view of Section 18 of the Act against impugned judgement and order passed by trial Court.

2. Whether impugned judgement and order passed by trial Court is against provisions of the Act as well as evidence on record.

12. Admittedly, District Magistrate, Allahabad passed order of attachment of property of respondents under Section 14-(1) of the Act against which respondents made representation before District Magistrate for release of property under Section 1