Prakash Shrivastava, J.

Heard finally with consent.

2. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner aggrieved with the order of externment dated 22-6-2015 whereby the petitioner has been externed from the district Shajapur and the adjoining districts under section 5(a) and (b) of the M.P. Rajya Suraksha Adhiniyam, 1990 as also the order dated 29-9-2015, whereby the Commissioner has dismissed the appeal against the order of externment.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the order of externment is based upon the old and stale cases, therefore, the same cannot be sustained in view of the settled legal position.

4. As against this, learned counsel for the respondents has opposed the writ petition.

5. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the record, it is noticed that the order of externment has been passed by the District Magistrate taking note of the 11 cases which are said to have been registered against the petitioner. A perusal of those cases reveals that the cases from Serial No. 1 to 9 are for a period prior to 2012. The said offences are of petty nature. So far as the case at Serial No. 10 is concerned, the said case does no