Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:88806-DB Court No. - 42 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 10595 of 2025 Petitioner :- Gyanveer @ Gyani Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Babboo Ram Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J. Hon'ble Anil Kumar-X,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.G.A. for the State respondents. 2. This writ petition has been filed for quashing the impugned notice dated 12.3.2025 issued by the respondent no.2 in Case No. 108 of 2024, (State vs. Gyanveer @ Gyani) under Section 3/4 of the Uttar Pradesh Control of Goonda Act, 1970, Police Station Bahadurgarh, District Hapur. 3. Learned A.G.A. raised a preliminary objection to the maintainability of the writ petition on the ground that the petitioner has opportunity to submit reply to the impugned show cause notice raising all the objections including that of jurisdiction to issue notice before the competent authority in view of the law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in Special Director and Anr. Vs. Mohd. Ghulam Ghouse and Anr., (2004)3 SCC 440. Thereafter, in case the petitioner is aggrieved by the decision of the Competent Authority, if any, he can assail the validity of the same before the Additional District Magistrate (Finance & Revenue) in accordance with law. 4. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, we dispose off this writ petition with liberty to the petitioner to submit reply to the impugned show cause notice before the competent authority raising all the objections as may be available to him under law including that of jurisdiction. In case any such objection is filed within ten days from today, the authority concerned shall decide the objections in accordance with law by a speaking and reasoned order expeditiously, preferably within a period of two months from the date of submission of a copy of this order along with copy of the reply, after affording opportunity to the petitioner. Needless to say that in case the petitioner is further aggrieved by the decision of the Competent Authority, he can always assail the validity of the same before the Additional District Magistrate (Finance & Revenue) in accordance with law. 5. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on merits of the case of the petitioner. Order Date :- 23.5.2025 Ujjawal (Anil Kumar-X, J) (Mahesh Chandra Tripathi, J) Digitally signed by :- UJJAWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad