An externment order based on the classification as a 'known rowdy' is valid if supported by ongoing criminal cases, and delay in appeal against such orders is not subject to condonation.

JUDGMENT

Alexander Thomas, J.

The prayers in the instant Writ Petition (Crl.) are as follows :

“1. Call for the records leading up to Ext.P2order and quash the same by invoking powers of this Hon'ble Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India holding that the petitioner is not a person coming within the term 'known goonda' or 'known rowdy' defined in the Kerala Antisocial Activities (Prevention) Act, 2007.

2. Issue any other appropriate Writ, Order, or Direction as the case may be as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and necessary in the interest of justice.”

2. Heard Sri.T.K.Ajithkumar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri.K.A.Anas, learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents.

3. The petitioner has instituted the above Writ Petition (Crl.), seeking for quashment of the impugned Ext.P-2 externment order dated 16.03.2022, issued by the Deputy Inspector General of Police, Thrissur Range, under Sec.15(1)(a) of the Kerala Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act [KAAPA], 2007, whereby he has been ordered not to enter the limits of Malappuram District, for a period of one year.

4. In the instant case, Ext.P-1 show cause notice dated04.03.2022 was issued by the 2nd respondent-Dy. Inspector General of Police, under Sec.15(1)(a) of the Act, directing the petitioner to show cause as to why an order of externment, as envisaged in Sec.15(2), shall not be passed, so as to direct that he shall not enter into Malappuram district for a period of one year. The petitioner was also invited for a personal hearing, as envisaged in Sec.15(1) of the Act. The 2nd respondent-DIG of Police has given opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner on 15.03.2022. Thereafter, the 2nd respondent has passed the impugned Ext.P-2 order dated 16.03.2022, holding that the petitioner would satisfy the parameters of 'known rowdy', as per Sec.2(p)(iii) read with Sec.2(t) of the KAAP Act and that the 2nd respondent is satisfied that the petitioner is very likely to engage in further prejudicial anti-social activities. Therefore, it is necessary that an order of externment be passed, so as to direct him not to enter the territorial limits of Malappuram District, for a period of one year from the date of service of the said order. Ext.P-2 order dated 16.03.2022 was duly served on the petitioner on 22.03.2022. Thereafter, the petitioner has filed Ext.P-3 representation dated 30.05.2022, before the 4th respondent-Statutory Advisory Committee, claiming that the representation is be treated as a statutory appeal, in terms of Sec.15 (2) of the Act, etc. The said Ext.P-3 representation dated 30.05.2022 was received by the 4th respondent-Advisory Committee on 01.06.2022. The 4th respondent-Advisory Committee has passed the impugned Ext.P-4 order dated 20.06.2022, holding that the said appeal under Sec.15(2) is time barred, inasmuch as the said provision mandates that the appeal has to be filed before the 4th respondent as against the externment order, within 15 days from the date of service of the impugned order. Accordingly, the 4th respondent-Advisory Committee has rejected Ext.P-3 representation as time barred, in view of the delay of 55 days in preferring the said appeal. It is thereafter, that the petitioner has filed the instant Writ Petition (Crl.) before this Court on 04.08.2022, seeking for quashment of the impugned Ext.P-2 externment order & Ext.P-4 appellate order. It is common ground that Ext.P-2 order has been served on the petitioner on 22.03.2022 and so, the said period of externment, as per Ext.P-2, will be in operation till 21.03.2023, by virtue of the mandate contained in Sec.15(1).

5. Sec.15 of the Act provides as follows :

“Sec.15. Power to make orders restricting the movements of certain persons. -

(1) The District Magistrate or a police officer of and above the rank of Deputy Inspector General having jurisdiction, if satisfied on information received in respect of a known goonda or known rowdy, after having given him an opp