Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:22758-DB Court No. - 42 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 17891 of 2024 Petitioner :- Mohammad Shahnawaz @ Shanu Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Manoj Kumar Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J. Hon'ble Prashant Kumar,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri G.P. Singh, learned AGA-I for the State. 2. This writ petition is preferred praying for the following principal relief: "(i) issue a writ order or direction of the nature of mandamus directing the respondent no.2 to decide the objection dated 02.05.2024 filed by the petitioner in Case No.914 of 2024, Computerised Case No.D202405310000914 (State Versus Mohammad Shahnawaz @Shanu) under Section 14 (1) of the Uttar Pradesh Gangster and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 expeditiously within a time bound period as may be fixed by this Hon'ble Court and further stay the effect and operation of the order dated 04.04.2024 passed by the respondent no.2 in Case No.914 of 2024, No. D202405310000914 Computerised Case (State Versus Mohammad Shahnawaz @ Shanu) under Section 14 (1) of the Uttar Pradesh Gangster and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, during the pendency of the objection dated 02.05.2024 filed by the petitioner before the respondent no.2." 3. While entertaining the writ petition on 18.10.2024, notices were issued. In response, Shri G.P. Singh, learned AGA-I, states that a detailed counter affidavit has been filed, which is not on record. He further states that the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, is a self-contained Act and that, against the order dated 04.04.2024, passed under Section 14 of the Act, 1986, if the petitioner claims a stake in the property in question, the appropriate remedy is to file a representation before the District Magistrate within three months, as per the provisions of Section 15(1) of the Act, 1986. He contends that, without exhausting the statutory remedy, the instant writ petition may not be entertained. He also submits that, even on merits, the writ petition lacks substance. 4. Considering the relief sought and the objection raised by learned AGA-I, we find that since an efficacious remedy is available to the petitioner, we are not inclined to keep the writ petition pending consideration for an indefinite period, especially when the petitioner has the remedy of filing an application/ representation under Section 15(1) of the Act, 1986. In the interest of justice, if the petitioner files an application within ten days, the same shall be considered on merits and decided expeditiously, preferably within two months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order. 5. With the aforesaid observations, the instant writ petition stands disposed of. Order Date :- 18.2.2025 NLY Digitally signed by :- NAND LAL YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad