Sanjay Shukla v. State under Section

Hon'ble Saurabh Srivastava,J.

1. Heard Sri L.K.Ojha holding brief of Sri A.K.Pathak, learned counsel appearing on behalf of petitioner and Sri M.C.Chaturvedi, learned Additional Advocate General assisted by Sri Yogesh Kumar Singh, learned AGA appearing on behalf of State.

2. Present petition has been preferred with the following prayers:- "i. Issue a order or direction to set aside the order dated 04.07.2024 passed in Misc. Case no. 6/2023 Sanjay Shukla versus State under Section 14(1) of U.P.Ganster Act, Mauja Ismaila Bhairo Dayal, Police Station- Jalalpur, District- Jaunpur and order dated 05.07.2023 passed by respondent no. 3 in Case no. 1414/2023 State versus Sanjay Shukla under Section 14(1) of U.P. Gagnster Act, Police Station-Jalalpur, District-Jaunpur to the extent the order dated 14.08.2020 is maintained for attachment of house of petitioner (Annexure nos. 12 & 15 to the petition)."

3. It is the case of the petitioner that in pursuance to Section 14(1) of the Gangsters Act, 1986 vide order dated 14.08.2020 passed by District Magistrate, Jaunpur, certain property in shape of agricultural land as well as constructed house of the petitioner has been attached, at the same time certain reports have been called from concerned police station and the petitioner has been extended three months time for filing objections, if any before District Magistrate, Jaunpur.

4. In pursuance to the order dated 14.08.2020 certain reports have been submitted from revenue department and based upon the same, separate report has been submitted by concerned police station, a detailed objections has also been filed at the behest of petitioner which culminated into order dated 05.07.2023 which impugned the present petition. Being aggrieved with order dated 05.07.2023 petitioner preferred a Misc. Case no. 6/2023 under Section 14(1) of Gangsters Act, 1986 before learned Additional District Judge/Gangster Act on the ground that attachment of part house is illegal but learned Special Judge, despite of all evidence in favour of petitioner rejected the case by confirming the order dated 05.07.2023 vide order dated 04.07.2024.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that after entertaining the objections preferred at the behest of petitioner agricultural plots have been released but at the same time two rooms of a house has been put under attachment by way of recording the reasonings that the rooms which were constructed in the year 2011 is appearing to be a new one as per the photographs attached with the report.

6. It is further submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that on the basis of the report, the order dated 05.07.2023 is also not maintainable since it has been categorically reported by concerned revenue authorities that the entire house is old in nature and the same was constructed in the year 1980 which is ancestral house of the petitioner but so far as regarding two rooms are concerned in shape of a new construction that was also built up in the year 2011, whereas the FIR which has been registered at Case Crime no. 21/2020 against the petitioner is in the year 2020 itself and as such the reasoning finding returned with the concerned District Magistrate is highly illegal and the same is not sustainable in the eye of law.

7. Per contra, learned Additional Advocate General assisted by learned AGA vehemently opposed the prayer as made in the petition and rebutted the stand taken up by learned counsel for the petitioner by way of taking recourse to the Section 14(1) of Gangsters Act wherein the District Magistrate is empowered even if the cognizance has not been taken over the charge sheet to proceed for attachment of the property concerned to the proposed accused.

8. After hearing rival submissions extended by learned counsel for the parties, it is apparent that one thing is also discussed in the earlier order that although charge sheet has been prepared way back in the year 2014 but the same has not been preferred before learned concerned court till 2025 and the same was apologized by Superintendent of Police, Jaunpur by way of filing his personal affidavit. In personal affidavit preferred by concerned Superintendent of Police, it has been indicated that a proper disciplinary proceeding has already been initiated against the concerned authority who failed to deliver his duties for preferring the charge sheet well within time before learned concerned court. The act and omission of conduct of certain police authority has already been taken into cognizance by the superior authority in shape of Superintendent of Police, Jaunpur and as such there is hardly any matter to proceed in that matter by this Court, being disciplinary and departmental domain of the Superintendent of Police, Jaunpur.

9. So far as regarding the merit of this matter is concerned, it is highly surprising that under which circumstances, the assessment of the house has been determined by District Magistrate being the old one only by way of perusal of the photographs rather the matter warrants a proper technical report by approved valuer/architect to ascertain the age of the house as well as the material applied therein with regard to valuation of the house concerned. In absence of any perfect and proper reasoning, recorded over the objection preferred at the behest of petitioner, impugned order dated 05.07.2023 passed by District Magistrate, Jaunpur and order dated 04.07.2024 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge (FTC-I), Special Judge, Gangsters Act, Jaunpur are liable to be set aside.

10. In view of the aforesaid discussions, impugned order dated 05.07.2023 passed by District Magistrate, Jaunpur and order dated 04.07.2024 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge (FTC-I), Special Judge, Gangsters Act, Jaunpur are hereby set aside. Matter is remitted back to concerned District Magistrate for arriving over the conclusion as fresh after due opportunity of hearing to concerned parties. Learned District Magistrate, Jaunpur is hereby also directed to release the property which has already been attached in favour of the petitioner forthwith and the same shall be subject to outcome of the fresh arrival over the objections as directed above.

11. The instant petition stands allowed accordingly. Order Date :- 10.3.2025 Shaswat SHASWAT SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Hon'ble Saurabh Srivastava,J.

1. Heard Sri L.K.Ojha holding brief of Sri A.K.Pathak, learned counsel appearing on behalf of petitioner and Sri M.C.Chaturvedi, learned Additional Advocate General assisted by Sri Yogesh Kumar Singh, learned AGA appearing on behalf of State.

2. Present petition has been preferred with the following prayers:- "i. Issue a order or direction to set aside the order dated 04.07.2024 passed in Misc. Case no. 6/2023 Sanjay Shukla versus State under Section 14(1) of U.P.Ganster Act, Mauja Ismaila Bhairo Dayal, Police Station- Jalalpur, District- Jaunpur and order dated 05.07.2023 passed by respondent no. 3 in Case no. 1414/2023 State versus Sanjay Shukla under Section 14(1) of U.P. Gagnster Act, Police Station-Jalalpur, District-Jaunpur to the extent the order dated 14.08.2020 is maintained for attachment of house of petitioner (Annexure nos. 12 & 15 to the petition)."

3. It is the case of the petitioner that in pursuance to Section 14(1) of the Gangsters Act, 1986 vide order dated 14.08.2020 passed by District Magistrate, Jaunpur, certain property in shape of agricultural land as well as constructed house of the petitioner has been attached, at the same time certain reports have been called from concerned police station and the petitioner has been extended three months time for filing objections, if any before District Magistrate, Jaunpur.

4. In pursuance to the order dated 14.08.2020 certain reports have been submitted from revenue department and based upon the same, separate report has been submitted by concerned police station, a detailed objections has also been filed at the behest of petitioner which culminated into order dated 05.07.2023 which impugned the present petition. Being aggrieved with order dated 05.07.2023 petitioner preferred a Misc. Case no. 6/2023 under Section 14(1) of Gangsters Act, 1986 before learned Additional District Judge/Gangster Act on the ground that attachment of part house is illegal but learned Special Judge, despite of all evidence in favour of petitioner rejected the case by confirming the order dated 05.07.2023 vide order dated 04.07.2024.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that after entertaining the objections preferred at the behest of petitioner agricultural plots have been released but at the same time two rooms of a house has been put under attachment by way of recording the reasonings that the rooms which were constructed in the year 2011 is appearing to be a new one as per the photographs attached with the report.

6. It is further submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that on the basis of the report, the order dated 05.07.2023 is also not maintainable since it has been categorically reported by concerned revenue authorities that the entire house is old in nature and the same was constructed in the year 1980 which is ancestral house of the petitioner but so far as regarding two rooms are concerned in shape of a new construction that was also built up in the year 2011, whereas the FIR which has been registered at Case Crime no. 21/2020 against the petitioner is in the year 2020 itself and as such the reasoning finding returned with the concerned District Magistrate is highly illegal and the same is not sustainable in the eye of law.

7. Per contra, learned Additional Advocate General assisted by learned AGA vehemently opposed the prayer as made in the petition and rebutted the stand taken up by learned counsel for the petitioner by way of taking recourse to the Section 14(1) of Gangsters Act wherein the District Magistrate is empowered even if the cognizance has not been taken over the charge sheet to proceed for attachment of the property concerned to the proposed accused.

8. After hearing rival submissions extended by learned counsel for the parties, it is apparent that one thing is also discussed in the earlier order that although charge sheet has been prepared way back in the year 2014 but the same has not been preferred before learned concerned court till 2025 and the same was apologized by Superintendent of Police, Jaunpur by way of filing his personal affidavit. In personal affidavit preferred by concerned Superintendent of Police, it has been indicated that a proper disciplinary proceeding has already been initiated against the concerned authority who failed to deliver his duties for preferring the charge sheet well within time before learned concerned court. The act and omission of conduct of certain police authority has already been taken into cognizance by the superior authority in shape of Superintendent of Police, Jaunpur and as such there is hardly any matter to proceed in that matter by this Court, being disciplinary and departmental domain of the Superintendent of Police, Jaunpur.

9. So far as regarding the merit of this matter is concerned, it is highly surprising that under which circumstances, the assessment of the house has been determined by District Magistrate being the old one only by way of perusal of the photographs rather the matter warrants a proper technical report by approved valuer/architect to ascertain the age of the house as well as the material applied therein with regard to valuation of the house concerned. In absence of any perfect and proper reasoning, recorded over the objection preferred at the behest of petitioner, impugned order dated 05.07.2023 passed by District Magistrate, Jaunpur and order dated 04.07.2024 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge (FTC-I), Special Judge, Gangsters Act, Jaunpur are liable to be set aside.

10. In view of the aforesaid discussions, impugned order dated 05.07.2023 passed by District Magistrate, Jaunpur and order dated 04.07.2024 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge (FTC-I), Special Judge, Gangsters Act, Jaunpur are hereby set aside. Matter is remitted back to concerned District Magistrate for arriving over the conclusion as fresh after due opportunity of hearing to concerned parties. Learned District Magistrate, Jaunpur is hereby also directed to release the property which has already been attached in favour of the petitioner forthwith and the same shall be subject to outcome of the fresh arrival over the objections as directed above.

11. The instant petition stands allowed accordingly. Order Date :- 10.3.2025 Shaswat SHASWAT SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad