HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 4584 of 2026 Court No. - 81 HON'BLE VIVEK KUMAR SINGH, J. 1. Heard Shri Kamlesh Kumar Tiwari, learned counsel for the applicant and Shri Rabindra Kumar Singh, learned AGA for the State of U.P. 2. Present application under section 528 BNSS has been filed for quashing the entire proceedings of the Case No.897 of 2026 (State vs. Ramlackhan Jaiswal), under Section 14(1) of the Uttar Pradesh Gangster and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 (hereinafter referred to as the Act, 1986), Police Station Cantt. District Gorakhpur, as well as impugned order dated 22.01.2026 passed by the District Magistrate, Gorakhpur in Case No.897 of 2026 (State vs. Ramlackhan Jaiswal),under Section 14(1) of the Act, 1986, arising out of Case Crime No.172 of 2025, under Section 2(b)(i), (iv), (viii)/3(1) of the Act, 1986, Police Station Cantt. District Gorakhpur. 3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant was falsely implicated in the Gangster Act, 1986 and a false FIR was lodged against him as Case Crime no.172 of 2025, under Sections under Section 2(b)(i), (iv), (viii)/3(1) of the Act, 1986. It is also submitted that the applicant has obtained bail in base case as well as in Case Crime No.172 of 2025. It is also submitted that proceedings under Section 14(3) of the Act, 1986 was initiated against the applicant and notice under Section 14(1) was issued by the District Magistrate on 19.08.2025. Thereafter, another notice was issued on 17.09.2025 and now 3rd notice has been issued by the District Magistrate, Gorakhpur on Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Kamlesh Kumar Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Ramlakhan Jaiswal .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. And 5 Others .....Opposite Party(s) 22.01.2026, which is the impugned notice and the same has been challenged herein. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is being prosecuted under the Act, 1986 only on the basis of pendency of a solitary case. The notices issued by the District Magistrate itself shows that the same was issued without application of mind. The act of District Magistrate is illegal, arbitrary and discriminatory. The malicious prosecution has been lodged against the applicant. He prays that considering the aforesaid facts, notice dated 22.01.2026 issued by the District Magistrate, Gorakhpur be quashed. 4. On the other hand, learned AGA opposed the prayer and submitted that three months time for filing reply was granted by the District Magistrate vide impugned notice dated 22.01.2026. The applicant instead of filing reply, preferred the present application under Section 528 BNSS, therefore, the present application is not maintainable against the impugned notice dated 22.01.2026. The alternative efficacious remedy is available to the applicant and he should have filed his reply before the District Magistrate. 5. I have heard the rival submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and perused the records. 6. As per Section 14(1) of the Act, 1986, if the District Magistrate has reason to believe that any property, whether movable or immovable, in possession of any person has been acquired by a gangster as a result of a commission of an offence triable under this Act, he may order attachment of such property whether or not cognizance of such offence has been taken by any Court. 7. As per Section 15 of the Act, 1986 where any property is attached under Section 14, the claimant thereof may, within three months from the date of knowledge of such attachment, make a representation to the District Magistrate showing the circumstances in and the sources by which such property was acquired by him. If the District Magistrate is satisfied about the genuineness of the claim made under sub-section (1) he shall forthwith release the property from attachment and thereupon such property shall be made over to the claimant. But where no NA528 No. 4584 of 2026 2 representation is made within the period specified in sub-section (1) of Section 15 or the District Magistrate does not release the property under sub-section (2) of Section 15, he shall refer the matter with his report to the Court having jurisdiction to try an offence under this Act. 8. On receipt of the reference made under sub-section (1) of Section 16 of the Act, 1986, the learned trial court (Gangster Act) shall fix a date for inquiry and give notices thereof to the person concerned and thereafter the court shall hear the parties and receive the evidence produced by them and would decide whether the property was acquired by the gangster as a result of commission of an offence triable under this Act and shall pass such order under Section 17 as may be just and necessary in the circumstances of the case. If upon such enquiry, the Court finds that the property was not acquired by the gangster as a result of commission of any offence triable under this Act, it shall order for release of the property of the person from whose possession it was attached. In any other case the Court may make 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. The order passed by the court concerned under Section 17 of the Act, 1986 is an appealable order under Section 18 of the Act, 1986. Therefore, applicant without adopting due process of law, has challenged the impugned notice dated 22.01.2026 before this Court. 9. The application under Section 528 BNSS is not maintainable since the applicant has efficacious alternative remedy to appear before the District Magistrate and he may file his representation within a period of three months from the date of his notice of attachment. The applicant is at liberty to appear before the District Magistrate and he may file his representation/objection, if so advised. 10. With the aforesaid observation/direction, the present application under Section 528 BNSS is disposed of. February 18, 2026 Nitendra NA528 No. 4584 of 2026 3 (Vivek Kumar Singh,J.) Digitally signed by :- NITENDRA TIWARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad