NARESH H.PATIL, PRAKASH D.NAIK
Imran Abdul Wahid Hasmi – Appellant
Versus
Dy. Commissioner of Police – Respondent
PRAKASH D. Naik, J.
Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith by consent of parties. Learned APP waives service for Respondents – State.
The petitioner has challenged the order of externment dated 30th December, 2014 issued by respondent no.1 under Section 56(1)(a) and (b) of the Bombay Police Act, 1951 (for short “the said Act”) as well as the order dated 9th April, 2015, passed by respondent no.3 dismissing the Appeal preferred by the petitioner under Section 60 of the said Act.
2. The factual matrix of the petition is as follows:-
(a) The Assistant Commissioner of Police Deonar Division, Mumbai had issued a show-cause notice dated 28th June, 2014 under Section 59 of the said Act. In the said show-cause notice, it was mentioned that it is proposed to extern the petitioner for a period of two years from Greater Bombay Suburban and Thane Districts. The show-cause notice refers to the statement of two persons recorded in-camera. It is further stated that the acts and movements of the petitioner are causing alarm, harm and danger to the peace living citizens and the businessmen in the area referred to therein. It is further mentioned that the witnesses referred to as witnesses (a
Pandharinath Shridhar Rangnekar Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Police
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.