Prayagraj, Mar 17 The Allahabad High Court has set aside an attachment order for immovable property in Ghazipur belonging to Mansoor Ansari, cousin of gangster-politician Mukhtar Ansari, observing that the state failed to establish any nexus between the commission of any offence and construction of the building/shops in question.
Allowing the criminal appeal filed by Mansoor Ansari, Justice Raj Beer Singh said that the state cannot seize property under the UP Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 based on mere bald allegations or simply because an individual is related to a known gangster.
The special judge, Ghazipur had upheld the decision of district magistrate to attach Mansoor Ansari's shops and building valued at Rs 26,18,025, on the allegation in a police report that the properties were 'benami' assets of late Mukhtar Ansari.
The high court said that the DM's power to attach property is not absolute and there must be material for objective determination by him that a person either as a member, leader or organiser of a gang acquired any property as a result of the commission of any offence mentioned under the Gangster Act.
"There must be a nexus between his criminal act and the property acquired by him. His mere involvement in any offence is not sufficient to attach his property as it is necessary to find out whether his acquisition of property was a result of commission of any offence enumerated in the Gangster Act being a gangster," the court observed in its judgment passed on March 12.
It further said that the expression "reason to believe" appearing under section 14 of the Gangster Act is a higher level of state of mind and cannot be equated to mere suspicion or doubt and that it but contemplates an objective determination based on intelligent care and deliberation.
The court also noted that the initial burden is always upon the state to satisfy that the property which is sought to be seized was acquired as a result of the commission of an offence mentioned in the Act.
It held that there must be a nexus between the commission of any offence and the acquisition of the property and this nexus has to be proven by the state at the first instance.
The high court also took note of the fact that in this case, applicant Mansoor Ansari himself had no criminal history under the Gangster Act.
While a case was registered against Mukhtar Ansari in 2007, the appellant was not an accused in that matter. In view of this, the court categorically remarked that "merely because appellant is cousin of said Mukhtar Ansari, it cannot be a ground to attach his property".
It further noted that there was absolutely no material to show that the appellant was associated with any gang or that there was any "nexus" between a criminal act and the property acquired.
The court found that the impugned order was against facts and law and thus, was liable to be set aside.
Setting aside the order of the Ghazipur special judge who upheld the DM's attachment orders, the high court directed the state government to release the disputed property forthwith.
