[Writ Appeal No.132 of 2022]

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Writ Appeal No. 132 of 202 2 {Arising out of order dated 25.10.2021, passed in Writ Petition (Criminal)

No.315 of 2021, by the Single Bench of this Court}

Bhupendra Kishore Vaishnav S/o D.D. Vaishnav, Aged About 42 Years R/o Near Kali Mandir, Kharsia, Tehsil – Kharsia, District - Raigarh Chhattisgarh ---- Appellant Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh, Through Secretary Home, Department Of Home Affairs, Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

2. Additional Chief Secretary, Department Of Home Chhattisgarh

3. District Magistrate, Raigarh District Raigarh Chhattisgarh

4. Superintendent of Police, Raigarh, District Raigarh Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents (Cause-title taken from Case Information System)

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

For Appellant : Mr. N.K. Malviya, Advocate For Respondents : Mr. Ankur Kashyap, Government Adv.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Division Bench Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal and Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Judgment on Board (02.04.2024)

Sanjay K. Agrawal, J

1. In this writ appeal, the appellant is calling in question the legality, validity and correctness of the impugned order dated 25.10.2021 (Annexure-A/1), passed by the learned Single Bench of [Writ Appeal No.132 of 2022]

this Court, in Writ Petition (Criminal) No.315 of 2021 (Bhupendra Kishore Vaishnav v. State of Chhattisgarh and others), by which the writ petition filed by the petitioner (appellant herein) has been dismissed and the order of externment of the appellant dated 07.12.2020, passed by the District Magistrate, Raigarh and that of the appellate authority dated 24.03.2021, in rejecting appellant’s appeal against the said externment order, have been affirmed/upheld.

2. Mr. N.K. Malviya, learned counsel appearing for the appellant submits that the learned Single Bench is absolutely unjustified in dismissing the writ petition of the appellant by recording findings which are perverse and contrary to the record. He also submits that the appellant has wrongly been subjected to externment for a period of one year, as there is no legal basis for imitating such an proceeding against him. He relied upon the decisions rendered in the matters of Deepak S/o Laxman Dongre v. The State of Maharashtra and others, [2022 LiveLaw (SC) 93] and Gulab Mahato @ Santosh Mahato v. State of Chhattisgarh, [(2017) 3 CGLJ 280] to bolster his submissions. As such, the impugned order is liable to be set aside and the present writ appeal deserves to be allowed.

3. Mr. Ankur Kashyap, learned State counsel supported the impugned order and submits that keeping in mind the settled legal [Writ Appeal No.132 of 2022]

position and the principles of law laid down by their Lordships of the Supreme Court in catena of judgments with regard to proceeding of externment, the learned Single Bench has rightly dismissed the writ petition filed by the appellant herein and, therefore, the present writ appeal also deserves to be dismissed at the threshold.

4. We have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival submissions made hereinabove and went through the record with utmost circumspection.

5. True it is that in the case at hand, the respondent No.03 i.e. District Magistrate, Raigarh by order dated 07.12.2020, has passsed an order of externment against the appellant herein for a period of one year from the vicinity of Raigarh District, which was challenged by the appellant in an appeal before the appellate authority (i.e. respondent No.02). By order dated 24.03.2021, the learned appellate authority has also dismissed the said appeal of the appellant on the ground that 09 cases have been registered against the appellant from 2010 and on 08 occasions proceeding for prohibition was conducted against him. The appellate authority has also recorded a finding that the appellant being a responsi