Allahabad High Court
Achchey Alias Ruksar Ahamd vs State Of U.P. on 22 December, 2022
Author: Ali Zamin
Bench: Ali Zamin
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 68 Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 3507 of 2007 Appellant :- Achchey Alias Ruksar Ahamd Respondent :- State of U.P. Counsel for Appellant :- Imran Ullah Counsel for Respondent :- Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Ali Zamin,J.
Heard Sri Mohd. Khalid holding brief of Mr. Imranullah, learned counsel for the appellant and learned A.G.A. for the State.
This appeal has been filed by the appellant against the judgment and order dated 06.02.2007 passed by learned Special Judge (Gangster Act) Allahabad in Case No. 07 of 2005 (State vs. Achhey @ Ruksar Ahmad) whereby property of the appellant attached under Section 14 of Gangster Act were not released.
Appellant claims the property discussed in the impugned order at serial nos. 3, 4 and 10, which are Araji nos. 445 situate at village Katka, Pargana Jhunsi, Tehsil Phoolpur measuring 5000 Sq.yard, Khasra no. 845 and 1095, Pipal Gaon measuring about 0.71 hectare and rifle 315 bore, licence no.523. He further submits that on the basis of five criminal cases, i.e., Case Crime Nos. 27 of 2001, P.S. Shahganj, 89 of 2001, P.S. Civil Lines, Allahabad, 91 of 2001, P.S. Dhoomanganj, 253 of 2002, P.S. Dhoomanganj and 311 of 2002, P.S. Dhoomanganj, his property has been attached. He submits that out of which in four cases he was acquitted/discharged and in one case, i.e., 311 of 2002 final report was pending before the court concerned due to which and learned Special Judge declined to release the property.
He submits that in Case Crime No. 311 of 2002 final report was accepted by order dated 23.09.2013, a copy of the order of all the cases have been annexed along with supplementary affidavit as Annexures 1 to 5. Proceeding against the appellant has been invoked on the basis of five criminal cases against appellant in all criminal cases appellant has been either acquitted or discharged and since cause of proceeding does not survive, therefore, attachment of the aforesaid property is not just and proper.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the appeal by submitting that in the impugned order the learned Special Judge has considered that the appellant has failed to prove his ownership with regard to rifle 315 bore bearing licence no.523, which is in the name of M.R. Ahmad son of Mohd. Miyan and he did not prove that the alleged plots were purchased by his earned money, therefore, the learned Special Judge rightly has not released the property of the appellant and rejected the application.
According to impugned order on the basis of five criminal cases the aforesaid property of appellant has been attached under Section 14 of Gangster Act.
Since basis of invocation of attachment is five criminal cases registered against him, which does not survive because of those have been decided and appellant has been either acquitted or discharged thereafter seeking source of income and evidence does not stand to reason. Learned Special Judge has not properly appreciated the matter, therefore, it is not sustainable In view of the above, impugned order is not sustainable. Accordingly, it is set aside.
Consequently, the appeal succeeds. The alleged property shall be released in favour of the appellant and rifle subject to having licence under the law.
Order Date :- 22.12.2022 MAA/-