Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
ASHUTOSH KUMAR, J.
VISHNU – Petitioner
Versus
LT.GOVERNOR OF DELHI & ORS. – Respondents
WP(CRL) No.2026/2015
Decided On : 04.12.2015
Externment - Delhi Police Act, 1978 - Section 47, Section 50, Section 51, Section 52
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner challenged an externment order issued by the Deputy Commissioner of Police, North East District, Delhi, which was upheld by the Lieutenant Governor of Delhi. The petitioner was accused in multiple cases under the Excise Act and Gambling Act, and was also involved in a case under the NDPS Act during the externment proceedings.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petitioner's involvement in various cases did not justify the externment order. It held that the grounds for externment were not supported by sufficient evidence, and the orders suffered from non-application of relevant considerations. The court quashed the externment and appellate orders.
Issues: The issues revolved around the legality and justification of the externment order, the petitioner's criminal history, and the sufficiency of evidence to support the order.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that an externment order must be based on clear and present danger, and the satisfaction of the executive authority must pass the test of reasonableness. It highlighted the need for fairness and strict adherence to the requirements of law in making externment decisions.
Final Decision: The court quashed the externment order and the appellate order, thereby allowing the petitioner's challenge against the externment.
ASHUTOSH KUMAR, J.
Crl.M.A No.13496/2015
Exemption allowed subject to just exemptions. The Application is disposed of accordingly
WP(CRL) No.2026/2015
1. Vishnu, the petitioner, has assailed the order dated 02.07.2015 passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Police, North East District, Delhi whereby he has been externed from the limits of NCT of Delhi for a period of one year with effect from 09.07.2015 as also the Appellate order dated 05.08.2015 whereby the externment order passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Police, North East District Delhi has been upheld.
2. Externment proceedings were initiated against the petitioner on 04.06.2013 when a proposal was sent for the same by the SHO of M.S.Park police station. The petitioner was noticed for his having involved himself in six cases, the details of which are as hereunder:-
SL. No.
FIR No.
DATED
SECTION OF LAW
POLICE STATION
1
27
14.02.1993
61/1/14 Excise Act
M.S. PARK
2
105
06.05.1998
61/1/14 Excise Act
VIVEK VIHAR
3
138
18.04.2003
61/1/14 Excise Act
M.S. PARK
4
280
04.11.2011
12/9/55 Gambling Act
G.T.B. ENCLAVE
5
59
11.03.2013
12/9/55 Gambling Act
M.S. PARK
6
78
03.04.2013
33 Delhi Excise Act
M.S. PARK
3. The petitioner appeared before the Deputy Commissioner of Police when he was made to understand the accusations against him. Despite the fact that there was no counsel accompanying him to defend his case, the petitioner was granted bail and was made to furnish his security bond. During the proceeding, he produced one defence witness namely Rakesh Kumar whose statement was recorded. On behalf of the prosecution, the SHO of M.S.Park was examined as a witness.
4. During the course of aforestated externment proceedings, the petitioner was found to be involved and therefore arrested in another case namely FIR No.378/14 (P.S.M.S.Park) instituted on 10.07.2014 for offences under Sections 20/21/61 and 85 of the NDPS Act. Pursuant to such an externment, a supplementary notice was issued to the petitioner on 14.10.2014. The aforesaid notice was also replied by the petitioner.
5. The Deputy Commissioner of Police, on perusal of the records and on hearing the parties came to the conclusion that the petitioner is a habitual bootlegger and has made his presence dangerous in the society. The police authority was also of the view that there was little possibility of the petitioner improving his conduct in future. Even the witnesses were found to be unwilling to depose in public against him because of the apprehension of reprisal at the hands of the petitioner. The petitioner was thus found to have had the propensity to indulge in further criminal activity.
6. Hence the order dated 02.07.2015, externing the petitioner from the territorial limits of National Capital Territory of Delhi for a period of one year with effect from 09.07.2015.
7. The petitioner was however directed to participate in the hearing of the Court cases.
8. Aggrieved by the aforesaid order of externment, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the Lieutenant Governor of Delhi. The appellate authority vide its order 05.08.2015 sustained and upheld the externment order.
9. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the order of externment as well as the appellate order are not sustainable in the eyes of law as no good ground has been made out for externing the petitioner.
10. From the perusal of records it appears that out of six cases for which the petitioner was noticed under Section 50 of the Delhi Police Act in the first instance, two cases are of the year 1993 and 1998 respectively under the Excise Act in two different police stations. In the aforesaid two cases of 1993 & 1998, the petitioner has been acquitted. There is one case of the year 2003 which again is under the Excise Act and lodged in M.S.Park police station. In the third case also the pet
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
