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

2022 Supreme(Bom) 227

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
V.K. Jadhav, Sandip Kumar Chandrabhan More, JJ.
Govinda s/o Pitambar Bhoi – Appellant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra through : Divisional Commissioner, Nashik, Division - Nashik. and Ors. – Respondents
Criminal Writ Petition No. 1301 of 2021
Decided On : 22-03-2022

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :S.D. Kotkar, Advocate
For the Respondent: R.V. Dasalkar, APP

The main legal point established in the judgment is that the authority has the power to extern individuals from a larger area if there is sufficient material against them regarding serious criminal activities, even if their activities are restricted to a specific area within the district.

Headnote:

Externment - Criminal Activities - Maharashtra Police Act, 1951, Section 55

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner sought to quash an order extending him from Jalgaon District for two years under Section 55 of the Maharashtra Police Act, 1951. The petitioner claimed the orders were erroneous and excessive, as his criminal activities were restricted to a specific area within the district.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that despite the petitioner's previous criminal activities, there was no improvement in his conduct, and he continued to engage in serious crimes. The court also noted the authority's power to extern individuals involved in dangerous crimes from a larger area to avoid breach of public order.

Issues: The main issue was whether the orders extending the petitioner from the entire district were excessive given that his criminal activities were limited to a specific area within the district.

Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the Maharashtra Police Act, 1951, Section 55, and the precedent set in the case of Sumit s/o. Ramkrishna Maraskolhe vs. Deputy Commissioner of Police Zone-1, Nagpur and another, to determine that the authority had the power to extern individuals from a larger area if there was sufficient material against them regarding serious criminal activities.

Final Decision: The court dismissed the writ petition and upheld the orders extending the petitioner from the district, finding that the concerned authorities had passed appropriate orders by considering the material against him in proper perspective.

JUDGMENT :

Sandip Kumar Chandrabhan More, J.

1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. By consent, heard finally at admission stage.

2. The petitioner is seeking quashing and setting aside of the order dated 27/05/2021 passed by respondent no. 2 i.e. the Superintendent of Police, Jalgaon, under which he is extended from Jalgaon District for a period of two years. The petitioner has also challenged the order dated 08/09/2021 passed by respondent no. 1, who has confirmed the earlier order of respondent no. 2 in Externment Appeal No. 62 of 2021.

3. Background facts are as under :

The petitioner claims to be a labourer in his local area maintaining his family peacefully. However, respondent no. 2 issued show cause notice dated 05/02/2021 under Section 55 of the Maharashtra Police Act, 1951 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') and thereby called explanation from the petitioner as to why he should not be externed from Jalgaon District for a period of two years since he indulged into criminal activities being a gang leader. The details of offences registered against the petitioner as mentioned in the notice dated 05/02/2021 are as follows:

Sr. No. Police Station Crime No. and Sections Name of the participated accused persons Present status

1. Ramanand Nagar 86/2017 (151/2017) under sections 147, 143, 148, 149, 323, 504 and 506 r.w. 34 of IPC 1. Govinda s/o. Pitambar Bhoi

2. Samadhan s/o. Harchand Bhoi

3. Sagar s/o. Harchand Bhoi Subjudice

2. Ramanand Nagar 234/2018 (415/2018, under Sections 307, 353, 295, 143, 145, 146, 147, 148, 149, 153, 135 of IPC 1. Sagar s/o. Harchand Bhoi

2. Harfan @ Eppo Yusuf pathan Subjudice

3. Ramanand Nagar 118/2019 (237/2019), under Sections 452 and 392 r.w. 34 of IPC Paddumn @ Banti Nandu Mahale Subjudice

4. Ramanand Nagar 70/2020 (205/2020), under Sections 324, 143, 147, 148, 504, 506,

135 of IPC 1. Govinda s/o. Pitambar Bhoi

2. Samadhan s/o. Harchand Bhoi

3. Sagar s/o. Harchand Bhoi

4. Paddumn @ Banti Nandu Mahale Subjudice

5. Zilhapeth 247/2019, under Section 389 r.w. 34 of IPC Paddumn @ Banti Nandu Mahale Subjudice

Besides this, the particulars of preventive measures taken against the petitioner and other gang members as per the provisions of Section 107 of Cr.P.C. are also mentioned therein. The petitioner thereafter submitted his explanation along with other two members in response to the aforesaid notice. Thereafter, respondent no. 2 by considering entire material against the petitioner and other members of his gang, passed the impugned order dated 27/05/2021 externing the petitioner and others from Jalgaon District as mentioned above. The petitioner preferred an Externment Appeal No. 62 of 2021 against the said order under Section 60 of the Act before respondent no. 1, but respondent no. 1 after reconsidering entire material along with the impugned order, dismissed the said appeal. As such, earlier order of respondent no. 2 dated 27/05/2021 bearing was confirmed.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that both the orders are prima facie erroneous since extraneous material was considered while passing the same. He also submits that the orders are excessive in nature since criminal activities shown against the petitioner, are only restricted to Ramanand Nagar Police Station, Jalgaon. He further submits that both the concerned authorities erred in passing the orders, which are based upon only two criminal cases registered against the petitioner, out of which one is of the year 2017 and another is of the year 2020. Thus, the learned counsel for the petitioner prayed for quashing both the impugned orders.

5. On the contrary, the learned APP has filed affidavit in reply and strongly opposed the petition and submits that the gang of the petitioner is known as 'Khandoba Gang' in the vicinity of Jalgaon District and the said gang is involved in serious criminal offences involving unlawful assembly, deterring public at large, beatings and attempting to commit murder, rioting etc. It is submitted by the learned APP

        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