Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2021
  6. /
  7. January

Shenaz Khan vs Sanjay Kumar Khatri

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|25 October, 2021
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. - 4
Case :- CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 4568 of 2021 Applicant :- Shenaz Khan Opposite Party :- Sanjay Kumar Khatri, D.M. Allahabad Counsel for Applicant :- Chetan Chatterjee,Ran Vijay Singh
Hon'ble Prakash Padia,J.
The applicant is before this Court for a direction to initiate contempt proceeding against the opposite party for wilful disobedience of the order dated 07.10.2020 passed in Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 9984 of 2020 (Shenaz Khan Vs. State of U.P. and Others), which for ready reference is quoted as under:-
"Heard Sri Chetan Chatterjee, learned counsel for the petitioner; Sri Manish Goyal, learned Additional Advocate General assisted by Sri A.K. Sand for the State-respondents; and perused the record.
The instant petition seeks quashing of the notice dated 10th August, 2020, issued by the District Magistrate, Prayagraj, under Section 14(1) of U.P. Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 (for short Act, 1986) attaching certain properties on the basis of police reports that those properties were acquired by Ateek Ahmad after entering the world of crime as a gangster against whom case crime no.200 of 2020, under Section 2/3 of the Act, 1986 has been registered.
The contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner is the owner of one of the attached properties and has acquired the property through a valid sale deed, which is yet to be set aside and earlier also proceedings under Section 14 of the Act, 1986 were initiated against Ateek Ahmad but were dropped. Hence, fresh attachment notice is not justified.
It has not been brought to our notice that any adjudication took place pursuant to the earlier notice. Under the circumstances, as there is no decision on the proceedings allegedly initiated earlier, the claim of the petitioner would have to be examined qua the claim of the State. More over, as the representation of the petitioner to the District Magistrate, Prayagraj, which is at page 65 of the paper book (Annexure-'7' to the petition), is allegedly pending, and would have to be considered in view of Section 15 (1) of the Act, 1986 and, thereafter, any adverse decision taken thereon would be referred to the court of Special Judge for an enquiry, the petition of the petitioner is premature, at this stage.
The petition is therefore disposed off by giving liberty to the petitioner to pursue her representation before the third respondent. The petitioner would also be at liberty to submit a copy of this petition which may be taken as part of the representation. It is expected that the third respondent shall take a decision on the representation of the petitioner after giving opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned, preferably, within a period of three weeks from the date a copy of this order along with copy of the petition is produced in his office. "
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that a copy of the aforesaid order was submitted for compliance before the opposite party but the opposite party has wilfully not complied with the order and, thus, has committed civil contempt liable for punishment under Section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.
Prima facie a case of contempt has been made out. However, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, one more opportunity is afforded to the opposite party to comply with the aforesaid order of the Court within six weeks from the date of production of a copy of this order.
With the aforesaid observations, this application is disposed of at this stage with liberty to the applicant to move a fresh application, if the order is not complied with by the opposite party within the stipulated time as aforementioned.
The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad, self attested by the applicant along-with 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 :- 25.10.2021 Swati
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Shenaz Khan vs Sanjay Kumar Khatri

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
25 October, 2021
Judges
  • Prakash Padia
Advocates
  • Chetan Chatterjee Ran Vijay Singh