( 1 ) THE petitioner has challenged the externment order dated 9/03/1988 passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Police Vadodara and the order dated 21/05/1988 in appeal by the Government of Gujarat contending mainly that the externing authority did not apply mind relied on extraneous matters did not give sufficient opportunity to explain the circumstances etc.

( 2 ) THE Superintendent of Police Vadodara by notice dated 16/12/1986 under Sec. 59 of the Bombay Police Act called upon the petitioner to show cause as to why he should not be externed from the limits of Vadodara City Vadodara Rural and contiguous Districts of Kheda Panchmahal and Bharuch for a period of two years as according to the Superintendent of Police the petitioner is a dangerous fanatic and strong headed person committing offence involving force and violence from June 1986 to the date of the notice in Vadi Maru Falia within the jurisdiction of the Vadi Police Station Vadodara. It was also alleged in the notice that the petitioner usually keeps illicit liquor in his possession and sells liquor and intoxicating drugs and drinks and in order to carry on the business of prohibited articles without any restraint he quarrels with the innocent people passing by under false excuses and causes them hurt and by pointing out knife threatens them to commit murder and thereby create an atmosphere of fear and terror and caused disturbance to public order. It is also alleged in the notice that he suspects people passing by as the informants of police or alleged against them that because of their movement his customers for liquor go away and under that excuse stops people passing by the place of liquor den at Vadi Maru Falia and by pointing out knife threatens them to commit murder. The third allegation is that the petitioner compels the drivers of the vehicles to transport liquor and in case of refusal he gets excited quarrels with them and pointing out the knife threatens them to commit murder and thereby creates an atmosphere of fear and terror in the society and causes disturbance in that locality. The notice further proceeds on to state that such movement of the petitioner in that locality causes fear and threat to the safety of the lives and properties of the people and because of his such unsocial activities other people are also likely to follow and indulge in such activities and accordingly the petitioner himself is a throat to the culture the social order and to the society at large. It is specifically stated that the action was taken against the petitioner under the existing ordinary laws and even then the petitioner does not give up his illegal activities. It is also stated that in case such unsocial activities continue the in further the results may be drastic and it is likely that serious offences may take place. It is alleged that the petitioner indulges in activities which affect the public order and there are reasons to believe that the petitioner commits offences punishable under Chapter XVI of the Indian Penal Code and the victims of his such offences are afraid of complaining or giving evidence in public because of the fear of the person and property against the petitioner. In order to extern the petitioner from the continuous Districts it is also stated in the notice that in case he is not externed from those Districts the petitioner is likely to carry on his activities through hi s agents or companions.

( 3 ) THE petitioner examined various witnesses and also asserted that be is working in a mill and did not indulge in such activities. The papers wore then submitted by the Superintendent of Police to the Deputy Commissioner of Police Vadodara. The Deputy Commissioner of Police Vadodara passed the externment order under Sec. 56 of the Bombay Police Act virtually on the same grounds. The Deputy Commissioner of Police in his order practically extracted the allegations in his notice and then stated that on overall consideration of the facts an