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

2018 Supreme(Guj) 494

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
S.G. SHAH, J.
BHAILALBHAI MAGANBHAI MALI - APPLICANTS
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS. - RESPONDENTS
SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION (AGAINST ORDER OF EXTERNMENT) NO. 8795 of 2017
Decided On : 08-01-2018

Advocates Appeared:
For the Applicants : Ms. Subhadra G. Patel
For the Respondents: Mr. Manan Mehta

Headnote:

Gujarat Police Act, 1951 –Section 56(b) –Deputy Police Commissioner issued a show cause notice under section 56(b) of Gujarat Police Act, 1951 to the petitioner inter alia alleging in the show cause notice that the petitioner is a Dangerous Person and doing his activities by using force or violence – Held, order of externment being Hadpari order passed by the respondent No. 2 is hereby quashed and set aside – Petition Allowed (Para 7)

JUDGMENT :

1. Heard learned advocates for the parties and perused the record.

2. The petitioner, who is the externee, has challenged the order of externment dated 02.11.2017 being Externment order No. No. PCB/HDP/161/17/2750/17 passed by the respondent No. 2.

3. The Deputy Police Commissioner issued a show cause notice on 29.09.2017 under section 56(b) of the Gujarat Police Act, 1951 (referred to as the ‘Act’ hereinafter) to the petitioner inter alia alleging in the show cause notice that the petitioner is a Dangerous Person and doing his activities by using force or violence. There is a specific allegation in the notice that the petitioner was doing all these activities within the jurisdiction of concerned Police Station.

4. In response to the show cause notice, the petitioner has not submitted his explanation to the concerned authority. The respondent No. 2 has passed the order of externment on 02.11.2017 externing the petitioner for a period of one year from the area falling under Vadodara City and Vadodara district.

5. 6. Per contra, learned APP submits that the competent authority has passed the impugned order after considering all the relevant materials and statement of witnesses as well as the fact that the petitioner is involved in other criminal offences, so as to demonstrate that there is likelihood of breach of peace in the area and therefore, the learned APP supported the impugned order and urged to dismiss the petition.

6. It may be pertinent to refer the following citations:

(1) Jagidsh Shamjibhai Makwana v. SubDivisional Magistrate, Bhavnagar reported in 2002(2) GLR 1158 &

(2) Rameshbhai Shankarbhai Sonara v. State of Gujarat reported in 2002(C) GLR 169

7. In view of the foregoing reasons, it becomes clear that there is absolute non compliance of mind while passing the order of externment and hence the petition deserves to be allowed and accordingly allowed. Thereby, the order of externment dated 02.11.2017 being Hadpari order No. PCB/HDP/161/17/2750/17 passed by the respondent No. 2 is hereby quashed and set aside. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Direct Service is permitted.


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