JUDGMENT - MANOHARAN L., J.:—The petitioner challenges the validity of order of externment passed by respondent No. 1 in Misc. Cr. Case No. 5/95 and confirmed in appeal.

2. The main ground urged by Shri Daga, learned Counsel for the petitioner is that Annexure-A - notice issued under section 59 of Bombay Police Act, 1951 (for short the 'Act') is defective and consequently the

proceedings taken on the basis of the said notice as well as the orders are vitiated. According to him, this Annexure-A - notice though mentions

certain cases does not mention the locality, area or period during which, the petitioner is alleged to have conducted himself in such a manner as to create danger or alarm to person or property within the meaning of section 56(1)(a) of the Act. The learned Counsel placed reliance on the case of (Tukaram v. P.P. Shrivastav Dy. Commissioner of Police and another)1, 1988 Mah.L.R. 203(D.B.). In the said decision, it is observed, in the notice therein, the allegations were so vague that it does not give any idea to the petitioner at all about the locality, area or the period during which he is alleged to have conducted himself in such a manner as to create danger or alarm to

Click Here to Read the rest of this document