Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:76630-DB Court No. - 42 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 9395 of 2025 Petitioner :- Dharmendra Singh Respondent :- State of U.P. and 4 others Counsel for Petitioner :- Vidya Kant Rai Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J. Hon'ble Anil Kumar-X,J. 1. Heard Sri Vidya Kant Rai, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri G.P. Singh, learned A.G.A.-I for the State respondents. 2. The instant writ petition is preferred under Article 226 of Constitution of India seeking direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 27.01.2025 passed by the Police Commissioner/Karyapalak Magistrate, Police Commissionerate, Kanpur Nagar in Case No.02 of 2025 (State vs. Vishnupal @ Jiledar) under Section 14 (1) of U.P. Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 (in short, Act, 1986), P.S. Chaubepur, Police Commissionerate, Kanpur Nagar, whereby the petitioner's property has been attached. 3. At the very outset, Sri G.P. Singh, learned A.G.A.-I has raised preliminary objection regarding maintainability of the present writ petition on the ground that against the impugned order, the petitioner has got efficacious alternative remedy to file an application under Section 16 (2) of the Act, 1986, wherein it is provided that where the District Magistrate has refused to attach any property under sub section (1) of Section 14 or has ordered for release of any property under sub-section (2) of Section 15, the State Government or any person aggrieved by such refusal or release may make an application to the Court referred to in sub- section (1) for inquiry as to whether the property was acquired by or as a result of the commission of an offence triable under this Act. As such, the writ petition is liable to be dismissed on the ground of alternative remedy. 4. We have heard rival submissions and perused the record. 5. We find that the Act, 1986 is a self-contained Act. The Gangster Court is competent to enquire as to whether the property was acquired by or as a result of the commission of an offence triable under the Act and if after enquiry the Court comes to conclusion that the property was not acquired by the gangster as a result of commission of an offence triable under the Act, the Court shall order for release of the property in favour of the person from whose possession it was attached. If the conclusion is otherwise, the Court may pass such order as it thinks fit for the disposal of the property by attachment, confiscation or delivery to any person entitled to the possession thereof or otherwise. Moreover, the Court is empowered to hold an enquiry and for the purpose of enquiry the Gangster Court is empowered to take any evidence and to summon any person as a witness as it considers necessary. 6. In this backdrop, we find that against the order impugned, the matter is already referred to the Gangster Court and the petitioner is having efficacious exhaustive remedy under Section 16 (2) of the Act, 1986. In case any such claim is set up before the Court within two weeks from today, we hope and trust that the Court would proceed in accordance with law and decide the objection/claim of the petitioner in accordance with law. 7. With the aforesaid leave, the instant writ petition stands disposed of. (Anil Kumar-X, J.) (Mahesh Chandra Tripathi, J.) Order Date :- 12.5.2025 RKP Digitally signed by :- RAKESH KUMAR PATEL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- RAKESH KUMAR PATEL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad