Allahabad High Court
Committee Of Management, Buddham ... vs State Of Up And 2 Others on 7 October, 2020
Bench: Pankaj Naqvi, Vivek Agarwal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 43 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 9412 of 2020 Petitioner :- Committee Of Management, Buddham Sharnam Inter College, Adarsh Gaon And Another Respondent :- State Of Up And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- V.K. Baranwal,Gyanendra Prasad Mahant Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Pankaj Naqvi,J.
Hon'ble Vivek Agarwal,J.
1. Heard Sri Ashok Khare, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Shantanu Khare for the petitioner and the learned AGA.
2. This petition has been filed by the petitioner- Committee Of Management, Buddham Sharnam Inter College, Adarsh Gaon seeking a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the order dated 27.08.2020 passed by the District Magistrate, Ghazipur whereby he passed an order for attachment of properties standing in the name of the society, under Section 14(1) of the U.P. Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 (hereinafter referred to as 'Act of 1986').
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that this action of the respondent authorities is per se illegal as there is no application of mind as well as the students have been shifted to a centre which in fact is meant for convalescing corona patients.
4. A perusal of the impugned order indicates that it has recorded reasons to believe on materials for invoking an order of attachment of properties on the premise that the same has been acquired 'benami' from the proceeds of criminal cases. Insofar the plea of students is concerned, we do not find any merit in the submission inasmuch as no student is before us.
5. Section 15(1) of the Act provides that where any property is attached under Section 14, the claimant thereof may within three months from the date of knowledge of such attachment make a representation to the District Magistrate showing the circumstance and the sources by which such properties were acquired by him. Section 15(2) provides that if the District Magistrate is satisfied about the genuineness of the claim made under sub-section (1), he shall forthwith release the property from attachment and thereupon such property is made over to the claimants.
6. Placing reliance on such provisions, the learned A.G.A. submitted that since petitioner has an alternative/statutory remedy as provided under Section 15 of the Act of 1986, in summary jurisdiction of the writ court, these matters should not be examined.
7. As per the scheme of the Act, not only Section 15(1) authorizes the claimants to make a representation to the District Magistrate, but even otherwise, there is a provision under Section 16 which authorizes the Court having jurisdiction to try an offence under the Act of 1986 to enquire into character of acquisition of the property.
8. In view of availability of alternative remedy, the petition is dismissed.
9. It is made clear that dismissal of the writ petition will not in any manner prejudice the authority concerned in passing appropriate order as per law, on its merits.
Order Date :- 7.10.2020 Vikram/-