Back
VIVEK CHAUDHARY, NARENDRA KUMAR JOHARI
Siraj Ahmad Khan Thru. Farheen Naz – Appellant
Versus
Addl. Chief Secy. Home, Govt. Of Uttar Pradesh – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Narendra Kumar Johari, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned A.G.A. for the State/respondents and perused the record.
2. Having considered the facts, circumstances and submissions of learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.G.A., we do not considered necessary it to call for the counter affidavit from the respondents.
3. By means of this writ petition, the petitioners have sought following main reliefs :-
(ii) to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus, commanding the Respondent No.2 & 3, to release the seized properties attached by him,
(iii) to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus, to the Respondent No.2 & 3, to permit the Representative of the Petitioners, for taking the Mango Crop at the seized Agricultural Farm of the Petitioners,
(iv) to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus, to the Respondent No.2 & 3, for ensuring the videography of the Mango Orchard and Residential House at the time of the release."
The court upheld the provisional attachment of properties under the Uttar Pradesh Gangster Act, emphasizing the petitioners' failure to prove lawful acquisition and the necessity of pursuing statutor....
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....
power of the Court to hold an inquiry under section 16 on the reference made by the District Magistrate is not an empty formality, which has a purpose behind it.
The court emphasized that property cannot be attached under the U.P. Gangsters Act without reasonable belief based on evidence, reinforcing the necessity of following natural justice principles durin....
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 attachment of property under the U.P. Gangsters Act requires a clear nexus between the property and criminal activities, which must be proven by the State.
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 Commissioner loses authority to decide on a representation once a reference to the competent court is made under the U.P. Gangster and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986.
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
