Back
SHAMIM AHMED
Sudha Singh – Appellant
Versus
State Of U. P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Law Deptt. Govt. Civil Sectt. Lko – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. Pleadings in the case have been exchanged between the parties.
2. Heard Shri Anurag Shukla, learned counsel for the appellants as well as Shri Ashok Kumar Singh, learned A.G.A-I for the State and perused the material available on record.
3. The present appeal under Section 18 of U.P. Gangster and Anti Social (Prevention of Activities) Act, 1986 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Gangster Act') has been preferred by the appellants, namely, Sudha Singh and Vijay Pratap Singh @ Gallan Singh with a prayer to set aside the order dated 19.10.2023 passed by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge / F.T.C.-II / Special Judge, Gangster Act, District Sultanpur in Crl. Misc. Case No.4/2022 (State Vs. Vijay Pratap @ Gallan) as well as the order dated 23/27.04.2022 passed by the District Magistrate, Amethi attaching/seizing the property of the appellants and the order dated 16.08.2022 passed by the District Magistrate, Amethi, rejecting the representations of the appellants and making reference to the learned trial court.
4. In short, the facts of the case are that appellant no.2, namely, Vijay Pratap Singh @ Gallan Singh was implicated in following cases:-
The main legal point established is that property attachment under the Gangster Act requires sufficient reason to believe that the property was acquired through gangster activities, and a formal inqu....
The main legal point established is that the attachment of property under the Gangster Act requires a formal inquiry to determine if the property was acquired through criminal activities, and the cou....
The court established that for property to be attached under the Uttar Pradesh Gangster Act, there must be a clear and substantiated connection between the property and criminal activities, and the b....
The main legal point established is that the District Magistrate must have sufficient evidence and reason to believe that the property was acquired through criminal activities before attaching it und....
The court emphasized that property attachment under the Gangster Act requires clear evidence linking the property to criminal activity, and failure to provide such evidence invalidates the attachment....
The judgment established the importance of an objective determination by the District Magistrate and the burden of proof on the claimant to show that the properties were not acquired as a result of a....
The expression “reason to believe” contemplates an objective determination based on intelligent care and deliberation involving judicial review as distinguished from purely subjective consideration.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement of 'reason to believe' for property attachment under Section 14 of the Act, the burden of proof on the State, and the need for a ra....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
