JUDGMENT - M.L. PENDSE, J.:---The petitioner is resident of Bombay and a social worker and prominent leader of Shiv Sena, a political organisation. The petitioner is also a member of Bombay Municipal Corporation and Member of Maharashtra Legislative Council. The petitioner visit various places in State of Maharashtra with a view to propound the philosophy of his organisation. The petitioner claims that his organisation is acquiring strength in urban as well as rural areas of State of Maharashtra and there is large following, especially of the young people in areas situate outside Greater Bombay. The petitioner's organisation contested elections of Aurangabad Municipal Corporation held in the month of April 1988 and Shiv Sena emerged as single largest party with 27 Corporators duly elected. The election of the Mayor and Deputy Mayor of the Corporation caused quite an upheaval as Shiv Sena was unable to get elected their Mayor and Deputy Mayor inspite of being a single largest group. The Congress (I) party was able to get elected the Mayor and Deputy Mayor of their choice and the result of the election led to serious riots in the city of Aurangabad and at Paithan and Bidakin in Aurangabad District. The riot broke out between two communities---Hindus and Muslims and led to looting, stabbing and various properties were burnt.

2. On May 20, 1988 the petitioner proceeded to Aurangabad and on reaching Aurangabad Air Port, order dated May 20, 1988 passed by the District Magistrate, Aurangabad in exercise of powers under section 144 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as ''the Code'') was served on the petitioner. The order, inter alia, recites that the communal riots have broken out for last about four days at Aurangabad, Paithan and Bidakin and the relations between the two communities have become tense. The incidents of burning, looting and stabbing have affected the life and property of the citizens. It further recites that the District Magistrate was satisfied that large number of Shiv Sena followers were involved in violence and though several members were arrested, the presence of the petitioner is likely to disturb the peace and tranquillity of the region and is likely to incite the feelings. The order specifically sets out that due to emergent situation and as period for service of notice upon the petitioner to show cause is not enough the powers are exercised under section 144 (2) of the Code. The petitioner was restrained from entering the limits of Aurangabad District for a period of ten days and if already entered then directed to leave it forthwith. In accordance with the notice, the petitioner came back to Bombay.

On June 18, 1988 the Additional District Magistrate, Aurangabad, served another order under section 144 (2) of the Code on the petitioner and three other leaders of the organisation restraining them from entering within the limits of Aurangabad District for a duration of 12 days, The order, inter alia, recites that the situation in the town of Aurangabad, Paithan and Bidakin where riots broke out in the month of May 1988, is returning back to normalcy, but Shiv Sena has filed a writ petition in the High Court, Aurangabad Bench challenging the election of mayor and Deputy mayor and the hearing of that petition is still pending, and therefore, the atmosphere of suspicion and fear amongst the two communities is still subsisting. The order further recites that attention of the members of two communities and the political leaders is concentrated on the expected decision of the High Court and as the situation is likely to deteriorate by the presence of the petitioner, the order is passed restraining the petitioner from entering the limits of Aurangabad District.

The third order dated July 7, 1988 was served by the Additional District Magistrate, Aurangabad on the petitioner and six leaders of Shiv Sena under sub-section (2) of section 144 of the Code restraining them from entering the limit

Click Here to Read the rest of this document