GORELAL GUPTA Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) UNDER Article 226 of the Constitution the petitioners are seeking a writ of certiorari for quashing the order of the District Magistrate. Chhatarpur, dated 7-12-1981 attaching the properties of the petitioners under Section 14 of M. P. Dakaiti Aur Vyapaharan Pra-bhavit Kshetra Adhiniyam, 1981, (hereinafter referred to as the Adhiniyam ).

(2.) PETITIONER No. 1 Gorelal is the husband of petitioner No. 2 Mannubai and father of petitioners Nos. 3 and 4 Laxmiprasad and Deviprasad. They constitute a joint Hindu family and residing in house No. 25 on Gandhi Road, Chhatarpur. They own Gupta Lodge and New Gupta Lodge near bus-stand, Chhatarpur. They also own some agricultural land. Gupta Lodge is run in partnership between petitioners 1 and 3 while New Gupta Lodge is in partnership between petitioners 2 and 4. The petitioners 1 and 2 settled down at Chhatarpur in the year 194849 and they had a modest beginning by running a grocery shop in the year 1951 and then they started a sweetmeat shop known as Gupta Mishthan Bhandar. They were also taking forest contracts in partnership with others. In 1964 a plot was purchased on the motor-stand and Gupta Lodge was constructed in the year 1965. The adjacent plot was purchased in 1965 and they constructed New Gupta Lodge later on. In the year 1970 the petitioners purchased one house on Gandhi Road, Chhatarpur and then constructed their present residential house thereon. The M. P. Dakaiti Pra-bhavit Kshetra Adhyadesh, 1981. was promulgated on 20-4-1981 specifying certain offences in the dacoity infested areas of the Stato, providing for more stringent punishment and speedy trial and making provision for attachment and confiscation of properties acquired through the commission of specified offences. In exercise of the power conferred by Section 22 (1) of the Adhyadesh, the State Government framed rules called M. P. Dakaiti Prabhavit Kshetra Niyam, 1981, brought into force from 20-8-1981. The Adhyadesh was amended by amending ordinance No. 11 of 1982 which came into force on 27-8-1982. The Adhyadesh was replaced by the present Adhiniyam which came into force on 7-10-1981. The definition of specified offences was enlarged to include cases of kidnapping also. The Adhiniyam was also amended by amending Act No. 29/82 which came into force on 29-10-1982. It appears that the District Magistrate received certain reports and forwarded the same to the Sub-Divisional Magistrate for enquiry. The police recorded statements of petitioners l and 3 i. e. Gorelal and Laxmiprasad on 6-12-1981. He then passed the impugned order that the petitioners own Gupta Lodge and New Gupta Lodge in bus-stand and house No. 25 at Gandhi Road, Chhatarpur, but they were unable to account for the same satisfactorily and, therefore, these properties have been attached under Section 13 (1) of the Adhiniyam. In the order-sheet of the same date he recorded that prior to 1965 the petitioners were living in a rented house and were in ordinary circumstances but they are in affluence after 1965. They have acquired valuable properties within the last 25 years, the acquisition of which have not been satisfactorily explained. In pursuance thereof, the Tahsildar attached the properties on the same day but the petitioners were permitted to reside in the portion of house No. 25 in their occupation on execution (of) a supratnama and the management of the two lodges were given to the Municipal Council, Chhatarpur. The petitioners moved an application on 8-12-1981 for release of the two lodges on their supratnama for management till completion of the enquiry which was rejected on 4-1-1982. The petitioners made a representation against attachment on 27-1-1982 explaining how these properties were acquired and submitting that their business is being regularly assessed to sales-tax and income-tax purposes and regular accounts are " being maintained. The petitioners then filed the present petition on 2-3-1982. Return was filed on 8-4-1982 by the respondents and rejoinder on 12-4-1982. However, by order dated 274-1982 the petitioners were permitted to manage the two lodges on their executing supratnamas during pendency of the petition. The lodges are being managed by the petitioners. By further order dated 3-6-1982 the District Magistrate opined that he was under the impression that reasons were not to be given as the rules framed under the Adhyadesh lapsed after the enactment of the Adhiniyam but on reconsideration it appeared that the same rules continued under the Adhiniyam in the absence of fresh rules being framed and so he is disclosing the reasons for attachment of the properties of the petitioners because the same were acquired out of the funds supplied by dacoit Muratsingh and his son Ramsingh.

(3.) THE petitioners' case is that they are permanent residents of Chhatarpur doing business there and owning buildings and agricultural lands. They started a Kirana shop in the year 1951 and thereafter a sweetmeat shop known as Gupta Mishthan Bhandar. They also started doing business in forest contracts in partnership with others. Out of the income from their business, they acquired a plot in the year 1964 for Rs. 3,000/-and constructed Gupta Lodge in the year 1965 on an investment of Rs. 27,000. The Lodge was opened by the ex-President of the Municipal Council. Further they acquired adjacent plot in the year 1965 for Rs. 7,000/- and then constructed New Gupta Lodge by investing Rupees 46,955/ -. Further improvements have been made in these properties, in the year 1970 they purchased a house at Gandhi Road for Rs. 20,000/- and thereon they constructed their residential house No. 25. They have been maintaining regular accounts and the same were scrutinised from time to time by the sales-tax, income-tax and weaith-tax authorities. They have been paying taxes regularly amounting to thousands of rupees. They have taken necessary licences for running the two lodges. In these two lodges tourists from India and abroad come and stay. The petitioners are not at all connected with any activities relating to the specified offences as defined in the Adhiniyam, They have no connection with any dacoit nor they are in any way involved in any case of dacoity or kidnapping. Before passing the impugned order, the District Magistrate did not ask the petitioners to produce their accounts and documents to explain acquisition of these properties nor any notice was given to them. Without any application of mind, the District Magistrate has passed the order attaching the properties. The petitioners were arrested under Section 12 of the Adhiniyam but they were granted bail by Special Judge on 6th and 8th of December 1981 as he found that there is no prima facie case to connect the petitioners with any specified offences. Their representation is not being decided.