S.P.KURDUKAR, A.D.TATED
Ayub Yusuf Mansuri – Appellant
Versus
Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Nandurbar & others – Respondent
2. Before passing the order externing the petitioner, he was served with a notice under section 59 read with section 56(1)(a) (b) of the Bombay Police Act, 1951, and in that notice the allegations made against the petitioner were that the criminal cases as per the schedule attached to the notice were pending against him and that he was again likely to commit such offences. After the notice was served, the petitioner filed his reply and after considering the reply, the learned Sub-Divisional Magistrate passed the impugned order.
3. The learned Counsel for the petitioner contends that the notice dated 28th April, 1984 under section 59 of the Bombay Police Act served on the petitioner, which was issued by the Sub-Divisional Police Officer, Nandurbar, is not in accordance with the requirements of section 56(1) of the Bombay Police Act. He submits that though it is mentioned therein that in the opinion of the Sub-Divisional Police-Off
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.