B.R.GAVAI, M.G.GIRATKAR
Ajay @ Golu Shyam Solanki – Appellant
Versus
State of Maharashtra – Respondent
B.R. GAVAI, J.
1. Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. Heard by consent of parties.
2. Petition challenges the order dated 12/9/2017 vide which the Petitioner has been externed from Yavatmal District and Tahsils of Wardha District, Taluka Washim, Karanja, Manora, Mangrulpir, Malegaon, District Washim and Amravati, Chandur Railway, Dhamangaon Railway, Nandgaon Khandeshwar, District Amravati, Taluka Chandrapur, Bhadravati, Varora, Korpana, District Chandrapur.
3. Petition deserves to be allowed on a very short ground. Perusal of Section 56 of the Maharashtra Police Act, would reveal that, when jurisdiction is sought to be exercised under Section 56(1)(b), it is necessary that, the authority exercising its jurisdiction should arrive at subjective satisfaction that a person is engaged or is about to be engaged in the commission of an offence involving force or violence or an offence punishable under Chapter XII, XVI or XVII of the Indian Penal Code, or in the abetment of any such offence and when in the opinion of such officer witnesses are not willing to come forward to give evidence in public against such person by reason of apprehension on their part as regards the safety
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.