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

2022 Supreme(MP) 218

VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA
Mahendra – Appellant
Versus
State of M. P. – Respondent


Advocates:
Shrey Trivedi for petitioner; Koustubh Pathak, Government Advocate, for respondents.

ORDER

1. In the instant petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged the order passed against him for externment under the MP Rajya Suraksha Adhiniyam, 1990 (for short Adhiniyam, 1990) by District Magistrate, Alirajpur and also the order passed by the Appellate Authority dismissing the appeal of the petitioner against the order of externment.

2. The facts of the case are that on the basis of report of Superintendent of Police, a show cause notice for externment was issued to the petitioner. The petitioner filed reply to the aforesaid show cause notice and submitted that the cases which are alleged to be registered against the petitioner are old and stale cases. In two cases, he has already been acquitted and two cases are of very petty nature in which small penalty has been imposed and rest cases are pending for trial.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the order passed by the competent authority is contrary to the provisions of section 5(A) and 5(B) of the Adhiniyam, 1990 and the order is passed on the old and stale

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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top