Allahabad High Court
Sanchit Verma vs State Of U.P. And 2 Others on 26 July, 2021
Bench: Surya Prakash Kesarwani, Piyush Agrawal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 46 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 3946 of 2021 Petitioner :- Sanchit Verma Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Vineet Vikram Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Surya Prakash Kesarwani,J.
Hon'ble Piyush Agrawal,J.
Heard Sri Imran Ullah Khan, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri M.C.Chaturvedi, learned Additional Advocate General assisted by Smt. Manju Thakur, learned A.G.A. for the State-respondents.
This writ petition has been filed praying for the following reliefs:
"a) Issue a writ of mandamus staying the implementation of order dated 05.03.2021 (Annexure No.9 and 17 respectively) passed by the respondent no.3 in pursuance to the proceedings initiated under Section 14(1) U.P. Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention Act, 1986 Act, Police Station Nawabad, District Jhansi, in relation to with Case Crime No. 286 of 2020 under Section 2/3 U.P. Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention Act, 1986 Act, Police Station Nawabad, District Jhansi.
b) Issue a writ of certiorari quashing the entire proceedings initiated by the Respondent no.3 in pursuance to the proceedings initiated under Section 14(1) U.P. Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention Act, 1986 Act, Police Station Nawabad, District Jhansi, in relation to with Case Crime No. 286 of 2020 under Section 2/3 U.P. Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention Act, 1986 Act, Police Station Nawabad, District Jhansi.
c) Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction Commanding the Authorities concern not to take any coercive measure against the petitioner's assets in pursuance of order dated 5.3.2021 (Annexure No. 9 and 17 respectively in the proceedings initiated under section 14(1) U.P. Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention Act, 1986 Act, Police Station Nawabad, District Jhansi, in relation to with Case Crime No. 286 of 2020 under Section 2/3 U.P. Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention Act, 1986 Act, Police Station Nawabad, District Jhansi."
The impugned order dated 05.03.2021 has been passed by the District Magistrate, Jhansi under Section 14(1) of U.P. Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 in Case No. 594 of 2019 (State Versus Sanjay Verma), P.S. Nawabad, District Jhansi, whereby certain properties were attached under Section 14(1) of the Act, 1986.
The second impugned order is the order dated 13.04.2021 passed in Case No. 01535 of 2021, (State versus Sanjay Verma), under Section 14(1) of the Act, 1986. By this order, the representation of the petitioner herein, namely, Sanchit Verma was considered and the property was again directed to be attached with an option to the opposite party-accused Sanjay Verma/Sanchit Verma to submit a representation within three months.
Aggrieved with these two orders, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition.
Perusal of the impugned orders shows that the petitioner, who is son of Gangster, namely, Sanjay Verma has not claimed any right or ownership of the attached property, namely, petrol pump, four vehicles and Bank account.
His contention in his representation is that the petrol pump and bank account are owned by Indian Oil Corporation and vehicles are owned by the Bank, who has financed it. Thus, the petitioner has not claimed either ownership or any right over the property in question. According to his representation, the land over which the disputed petrol pump is installed, belongs to his father, namely, Sanjay Verma and not to him.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that once the order dated 05.03.2021 was passed by the District Magistrate, Jhansi, under Section 14(1) of the Act, 1986 attaching the property in question and giving liberty for filing representation within three months, it was not open for the District Magistrate, Jhansi to pass an order again under Section 14(1) of the Act,1986 attaching the property and again granting three months time to file representation. He could have passed order under Section 15(2) of the Act and in case of rejection of the claim could refer the matter to the Court under Section 16(1) of the Act, 1986 Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the claimant, who so ever may be, should be permitted to file a representation under section 15 of the Act, 1986 within a week and thereupon the District Magistrate may decide the same within a reasonable time.
Learned Additional Advocate General states that if any claimant comes forward and makes a representation under section 15 of the Act, 1986 then the District Magistrate shall pass an order in accordance with law.
Considering the statements of learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Advocate General, this writ petition is disposed of with the direction that in the event any representation is filed by a claimant of the attached properties within two weeks from today then the same shall be considered by the District Magistrate and an appropriate order in accordance with law shall be passed within the next four weeks, after affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to the claimant.
Order Date :- 26.7.2021 samz