SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Kar) 2126

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
M. Nagaprasanna, J.
Sri. Ayan S/O. Ikbal Attar - Petitioner
Versus
The State Of Karnataka Rep. By Its Secretary, Department Of Home – Respondent
Writ Petition No. 109464 of 2025 (GM-POLICE)
Decided On : 09-12-2025

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:Sri. P. G. Chikkanaragund, Advocate
For the Respondent: Sri. T. Hanumareddy, Aga

The court ruled that the general nature of allegations must be communicated to a person sought to be externed, without requiring full disclosure of police reports, maintaining compliance with natural justice.

Headnote:(A) Karnataka Police Act, 1963 - Sections 55 and 58 - Externment of individuals - The court held that not all police reports and documents need to be furnished to the person being externed; only the general nature of material allegations must be communicated. It affirmed that principles of natural justice were upheld as notices were provided and the opportunity to be heard was granted. The Assistant Commissioner must specify the provision under which an externment order is made. (Paras 10.10, 10.16, 11.6, 12.1)

(B) Judicial Review - The court held improper exercise of power in externment orders could be subject to judicial review if procedure under Section 58 was not followed or if material evidence was absent. (Paras 13.3, 14.1)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner challenged an externment order claiming violation of natural justice due to lack of access to all police reports.

Findings of Court:
The order did not clarify whether under Section 55(a) or (b) it was imposed, necessitating remittance for a reasoned order.

Issues: The necessity of providing complete police documentation to the externee before issuing an externment order.

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the need for clarity in externment orders and the specific mentioning of provisions under which such orders are made.

Result: Writ petition partly allowed; matter remitted for fresh consideration.

Table of Content
1. petitioner's request for legal relief. (Para 1 , 2)
2. considerations around the legality of the externment process. (Para 3)

ORDER :

M. NAGAPRASANNA, J.

1. The petitioner is before this Court seeking the following reliefs:

b. To issue any other order or direction as this Hon’ble Court deems fit in the interest of justice.

2. Heard the learned counsel Sri. P.G. Chikkanaragund appearing for the petitioner and the learned AGA Sri. T. Hanumareddy representing respondents.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that, the issue in the lis stands covered by the judgment rendered by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Writ Petition No.30021/2025, disposed off on 17th November 2025, wherein it is held as follows:

8. The points that would arise for consideration are;

1. Whether all police reports and documents, including FIR, statements, charge sheet, etc., are required to be furnished to the person who is sought to be externed?

2. Whether there is a requirement in all cases for the Assistant Commissioner to consider and State as to whether witnesses have not come forward or would not come forward to depose against the person who is sought to be externed, if he continues to reside within the jurisdiction?

3. Whether the principles of natural Justice have been followed in the present case?

4. Is there any infirmity in the impugned order requiring this Court to intercede?

5. What order?

9. I answer the above points as follows;

10. Answer to point No.1: Whether all police reports and documents, including FIR, statements, charge sheet, etc., are required to be furnished to the person who is sought to be externed?

10.1. The submission of Sri.Tharanath Poojary., learned Senior Counsel for the Petitioner, is that without the reports and documents being furnished along with the show-cause notice, the Petitioner as the addressee of the notice, would not know what to reply to. The principle of natural Justice would stand completely violated if they are not furnished.

10.2. After the appearance of the Petitioner before the Assistant Commissioner, two additional cases were filed. Though a request had been made for furnishing the same, copies were not furnished. On that ground, he submits that the rights of the Petitioner have been adversely affected.

10.3. In that regard, he has relied upon the decision in Sachin M.R’s case and contends that if all documents are not furnished, and there is no acknowledgement of such service on the externee, then the order for the externment would be required to be set aside.

10.4. A persusal of said judgment in Sachin's case does not indicate that it is so inasmuch as that decision was one relating to service of notice and not service of documents, and it is in the background of the show-cause notice not having been issued, that the above observations were made.

10.5. In the present case, the issue raised by the Petitioner is as regards service of documents and not that of service of notice, notice having been received and acknowledged by the Petitioner to have been so received, and sunsequently having been represented by legal counsel in the proceedings before the Assistant Commissioner.

10.6. Learned Advocate General would submit that under Sub-section (1) of Section 58 of the KP Act, 1963, all the documents and details are not required to be furnished; only material allegations are required to be made known to the person sought to be externed. The show-cause notice detailing the allegations against the Petitioner, the Petitioner was well aware of what the Petitioner had to reply to.

10.7. Be that as it may, he submits that the police reports have been furnished to the Petitioners, this being done by the State in its fairness and not because the Petitioner is entitled thereto.

10.8. He relies on Hari Khemu Gawali’s case to contend that what is required to be informed to the person sought to be externed is the general nature of material allegations. There is no requirement to furnish all docu

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top