SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2019 Supreme(Bom) 1141

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD
T.V. Nalawade, K.K. Sonawane, JJ.
Prashant – Appellant
Versus
State of Maharashtra – Respondent
Criminal Writ Petition No. 567 of 2019
Decided On : 27-06-2019

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
Neha B. Kamble, R.D. Sanap.

Headnote:

Constitution of India,1950 – Article 21 and 19(d)(e) – Indian Penal Code,1908 – Section 353,323 and 353 – Criminal Procedure Code,1973 – Section 107 - Bombay Police Act – Section 55,56,57, 57A,2(a),58 and 59 - Externment - Property - Submissions made and record show that cause notice was issued under section 59 of Bombay Police Act against the petitioner and he was informed that externment was proposed against him in respect and surrounding locality as due to his presence danger is created to life and property of persons and even after taking preventive measures against him, he has not improved his conduct - Proposal was made to make the order of externment in respect of entire district - Specific material was mentioned as registered against him in Police Station for offences punishable under section 384 of Indian Penal Code and Crime registered against him for offences punishable under sections 353, 323, 149 etc. of IPC and one chapter case filed by police under section 107 of Cr.P.C - Chapter case was filed was under investigation - Case was filed - In the notice, he was asked to appear before Sub-Divisional Police Officer - Petitioner filed his reply on and he submitted that he is a social worker and is President of Association created for benefit of triable people and particularly students of tribes and due to the fact that he has become popular, some persons who want to oppose his activities must have become angry and so, aforesaid crimes are registered and they want to stop his activities - Whether such larger area has within it contiguous or interconnected or intimately connected pockets of areas or not – Held, meaning of aforesaid two terms show that legislature did not expect order of externment against person who has dispute with one or two persons or who is having dispute of private nature - This is the main thing which needs to be kept in mind by concerned police while making proposal for externment and also the officer passing externment order - In view of the aforesaid object behind the provision of section 56 of Act, words of expressions used in section 56(1)(a) and (b) like alarm, danger or harm to person or property needs to be read as they are referring to public at large and not to one or two individuals known to the proposed externee (Reliance placed on the observations made in the case reported as Balu Shivling Dombe vs. The Divisional Magistrate, Pandharpur and Another, (1969) AIR Bom. 351 (V 56 C 57) - Relevant facts of present matter are already quoted - Only two crimes were registered - Some material which is ultimately used in the externment order was not mentioned in the show cause notice - This Court holds that externment order made against petitioner cannot sustain in law - Petition is allowed.

JUDGMENT :

T.V. Nalawade, J.

1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. By consent, heard both the sides for final disposal.

2. The petition is filed to challenge the order of externment made by Sub-Divisional Police Officer (Sub-Divisional Magistrate) Hingoli on 24.9.2018 in Externment Case No. 3/2018. The order made by the appellate authority, another officer, Divisional Commissioner, Aurangabad is also challenged.

3. The submissions made and the record show that on 25.7.2018 show cause notice was issued under section 59 of Bombay Police Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act for short) against the petitioner and he was informed that externment was proposed against him in respect of Hingoli city and surrounding locality as due to his presence danger is created to the life and property of persons and even after taking preventive measures against him, he has not improved his conduct. The proposal was made to make the order of externment in respect of entire Hingoli district. Specific material was mentioned as C.R. No. 83/2018 registered against him in Kalamnuri Police Station for the offences punishable under section 384 of Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as IPC for short) and Crime No. 242/2017 registered against him for the offences punishable under sections 353, 323, 149 etc. of IPC and one chapter case filed by Kalamnuri police bearing No. 79/2018 under section 107 of Cr.P.C. The chapter case was filed on 12.6.2018 and C.R. No. 83/2018 was under investigation. Case was filed only in C.R. No. 242/2017. In the notice dated 25.7.2018, he was asked to appear before the Sub-Divisional Police Officer on 2.8.2018. The petitioner filed his reply on 12.9.2018 and he submitted that he is a social worker and is President of Adiwasi Panther Association created for the benefit of triable people and particularly the students of tribes and due to the fact that he has become popular, some persons who want to oppose his activities must have become angry and so, the aforesaid crimes are registered and they want to stop his activities.

4. The order of externment was made by Sub-Divisional Magistrate on 24.9.2018. In the externment order, he mentioned aforesaid three specific circumstances appearing against the petitioner and it was also mentioned that confidential witness described as "A" had informed that the petitioner was creating hatred amongst people of Hindu and Muslim communities and he was giving threats to public servants and his associates are having criminal intention and due to his activities nobody is willing to come forward to give evidence against him as they are afraid of harm to their person or property. Though the crimes were registered only in Hingoli and Kalamnuri Police Station of aforesaid nature, the Sub-Divisional Magistrate has observed that the contiguous tahsils will be affected due to his activities considering the means of transportation and so the order was made in respect of entire Hingoli district and the period given is of two years. This order is confirmed by the Divisional Commissioner, Aurangabad.

5. The petitioner has produced the record in respect of N.G.O. registered under the name of Triable Panther Association and his activities of social work are given by him along with the cuttings of newspaper in which his agitations were published. It was submitted that these activities were not for the interest of the petitioner, but they were in the interest of public at large and particularly, for the interest of triable students and he had unearthed the illegal activities of some authorities and some institutions which were affecting the interest of triable students.

6. This Court feels that it is necessary to first quote the relevant facts of the matter. In show cause notice which is required to be issued under section 59 of the Act, information needs to be given to the proposed externee about the activities informed by police and which in the opinion of the officer exercising powers are covered by the pro

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top