Back
HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD (LUCKNOW BENCH)
Hon'ble Shamim Ahmed,J.
Babu Khan – Appellant
Versus
State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko. – Respondent
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 1203 of 2023 at Lucknow
Gangster Act - Property Attachment - Sections 14, 15, 16, 17 - The property attached must have been acquired by the gangster as a result of commission of an offence triable under the Act. The District Magistrate must have reason to believe so. The Court has to hold a formal inquiry to find the truth and pass a reasoned order.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant, Babu Khan, challenged the orders of attachment of his movable and immovable properties by the District Magistrate under Sections 14 and 16 of the U.P. Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986. The District Magistrate had attached the properties based on a police report alleging that the appellant had acquired the properties through his involvement in criminal activities as a member of a gang.
Finding of the Court:
The Court found that the District Magistrate had not recorded any reason to believe that the properties were acquired by the appellant as a result of commission of an offence triable under the Gangster Act. The Court also found that the inquiry under Section 16 was not conducted properly, and the trial court had passed the impugned orders in a mechanical manner without analyzing the evidence. The Court held that the properties were acquired by the appellant through legal means and not from the proceeds of criminal activities.
Issues: Whether the District Magistrate had the requisite reason to believe that the properties were acquired by the appellant as a result of commission of an offence triable under the Gangster Act, and whether the inquiry under Section 16 was conducted properly.
Ratio Decidendi: For attachment of property under Section 14 of the Gangster Act, the District Magistrate must have reason to believe that the property was acquired by the gangster as a result of commission of an offence triable under the Act. The Court has to hold a formal inquiry under Section 16 to determine whether the property was acquired from the proceeds of criminal activities, and pass a reasoned order under Section 17.
Final Decision: The Court quashed the orders of attachment and directed the District Magistrate to release the properties of the appellant.
Hon'ble Shamim Ahmed,J.
1. Pleadings in the case have been exchanged between the parties.
2. Heard Sri Satendra Nath Rai, learned counsel for the appellant as well as Dr. V.K. Singh, learned Government Advocate alongwith Sri Ashok Kumar Singh, learned A.G.A.-1 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 appellant, namely, Babu Khan, with a prayer to set aside the judgment and order dated 03.03.2023 passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge/Special Judge (Gangster Act), Court No. 13, Lakhimpur Kheri, in Criminal Misc. Case Nos. 210 of 2022 and 218 of 2022, titled Babu Khan v. State of U.P., under section 16 of the U.P. Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (prevention) Act, 1986, Case Crime No. 0243 of 2022, under section 2/3 of the U.P. Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (prevention) Act, 1986, P.S. Pasgawan, District Lakhimpur Kheri. It has further been prayed that the attachment-order dated 08.06.2022 passed in Case No. 1158 of 2022 (Annexure-4 to the application) and order dated 27.06.2022 (Annexure-5 to the application) passed in Case No. 1349 of 2022 under Section 14(1) of the U.P. Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (prevention) Act, 1986, passed by the District Magistrate, Lakhimpur Kheri, whereby the District Magistrate attached the following property of the appellant including a house situated at Town Mohammadi, with the finding that the appellant has purchased the property- movable and immovable- from the income earned by involving in anti-social activities :
4. In short, the facts of the case are that in case No. 1158 of 2022, action was started on report of the Inspector In-charge, Police Station Mohammadi, dated 01-06-2022, which was approved by the Circle Officer, Mohammadi, on 01-06-2022; by the Addl. Superintendent of Police on 04-06-2022 and was sent by the Superintendent of Police alongwith his recommendation on 06.06.2022. It was mentioned in the police report that Babu Khan S/o Irshad Khan, resident of village Barainchi, P.S. Pasgwan, District Kheri (appellant herein), who is an accused in FIR No. 243/2022 Section-2B/3, U.P. Gangster and Anti- Social Activities (Prevention) Act 1986, P.S. Pasgwan, has the criminal history as follows:-
1- Case Crime No. 1868/11 Section-147/504/506/420/467/468 IPC, Police Station Mohammadi, District Kheri;
2- Case Crime No. 445/18 Section 447, IPC and 2/3, Prevention of Damage to Public Property, Police Station Pasgwan, District Kheri;
3- Case Crime No. 214/22, Section-385/447/504/506 IPC, Police Station Pasagwan, District Kheri;
4- Case Crime No. 215/22, Section-147/452/504/506 IPC, Police Station Pasagwan, District Kheri;
5- Case Crime No. 219/22 Section 447 IPC and 2/3, Prevention of Damage to Public Property, Police Station Pasgwan, District Kheri;
6- Case Crime No. 226/22 Section-447 IPC 7- Case Crime No. 243/22 Section-2B/3, UP Gangesters and Anti- Social Activities (Prevention) Act, Police Station Pasgwan, District Kheri.
5. It was mention
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
