NEETU YADAV Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Sri Daya Shanker Misra, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned Additional Government Advocate.

(2.) THE present writ petition has been preferred by the petitioner feeling aggrieved by order dated 29th September 2007 (contained in Annexure-15 to the petition) passed by District Magistrate, Lucknow under section 14 (1) of the u. P. Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 (hereinafter referred to as the Act, 1986) thereby attaching the property owned by the petitioner. The District Magistrate, Lucknow, in the impugned order has mentioned that the property in question has been acquired as a result of commission of offences triable under Act, 1986.

(3.) FROM the impugned order, it is explicit that certain landed property of the petitioner has been attached, which property, as per subjective satisfaction of the District Magistrate, has been acquired'as a result of commission of offences triable under Act, 1986.