Court No. - 47
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 7659 of 2021 Petitioner :- Satish @ Pudina @ Satish Gaur Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Bed Kant Mishra,Ashwani Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J. Hon'ble Shamim Ahmed,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.G.A. for the State respondents.
Present writ petition is preferred seeking following reliefs:-
"(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari to quash the impugned ex-parte order dated 20.12.2005 passed by respondent no.2 in Case No.33 of 2004 (State vs. Satish @ Pudina) under Section 16 (2) U.P. Gangster and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, Police Station Nawabganj, District Kanpur Nagar.
(ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent no.2 to decide the representation dated 19.12.2019 moved by the petitioner for release his property which has been seized in pursuance of order dated 30.10.2004 forthwith in favour of the petitioner."
Learned A.G.A. has raised a preliminary objection regarding maintainability of the present writ petition on the ground that the proceeding has been finalized way back in the year 2005. Thereafter, the matter was referred to the competent court and accordingly, the competent court has also proceeded in the matter. In case the petitioner has any grievance, he can invoke the remedy as available in law.
We have occasion to peruse the record in question and find that the first information report was lodged against the petitioner on 29.5.2002 and the same was registered as Case Crime No.172 of 2002 under Section 16 (2) of U.P. Gangster and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act. In pursuance of the said FIR, the investigating officer prepared a gang-chart showing some criminal cases pending against the petitioner. Thereafter, the charge sheet was submitted before the competent court. During the pendency of the aforesaid criminal case, the District Magistrate, Kanpur Nagar had proceeded to seize his house on 30.10.2004. The petitioner moved several applications for release of his house. Finally, by the impugned order dated 20.12.2005 the second respondent had rejected the application moved by the petitioner. Admittedly, on the basis of instructions of the Senior Superintendent of Police, Kanpur Nagar dated 28.10.2004, the District Magistrate had seized the house of the petitioner on 30.10.2004 and the competent court has also proceeded in the matter. In case the competent court has not sought the demand of the petitioner for release of the property in question, he can have remedy to file an appeal under Section 18 of U.P. Gangster and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986. Once efficacious alternative remedy is available to the petitioner, then there is no reason or occasion to bypass the statutory forum.
The writ petition is misconceived and dismissed. However, leave is always open to the petitioner to invoke the remedy as available in law.
The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad, self attested by the petitioners alongwith a self attested identity proof of the said person (preferably Aadhar Card) mentioning the mobile number to which the said Aadhar Card is linked.
The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.
Order Date :- 24.9.2021 RKP