... 1 ...

IN

IN

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL

CRIMINAL

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

APPELLATE JURISDICTION

APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL

CRIMINAL

CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.1560 OF 2006

WRIT PETITION NO.1560 OF 2006

WRIT PETITION NO.1560 OF 2006

Shri Mohan Gabbarsingh Neggy

)

aged about 23 yrs., an Indian

)

inhabitant having residence at

)

Jay Ambika Bhawani Chawl,

)

Hanuman Nagar, Kandivali (E),

)

Bombay

) ...Petitioner

Vs.

The State of Maharashtra

)

(At the instance of Samta Nagar

)

Police Station)

) ...Respondent

Shri M.R.Patil for the Petitioner.

Shri A.S.Shitole, A.P.P. for the Respondent.

CORAM

CORAM

CORAM : A. S. OKA, J.

: A. S. OKA, J.

: A. S. OKA, J.

DATE

DATE

DATE : SEPTEMBER 15, 2006.

: SEPTEMBER 15, 2006.

: SEPTEMBER 15, 2006.

JUDGMENT:

JUDGMENT:

JUDGMENT:

1.

Heard the Advocates appearing for the parties.

The

challenge

in

this

Petition

under

Article

227

of

the

Constitution

of

India

is

to

the

order

dated

10th

February,

2006

passed

by

the

Deputy

Commissioner

of

police,Mumbai

under

section

60

of

the

Bombay

Police

Act,

1951.

By

the

said

order,

the

Petitioner

has

been

ordered

to

be

externed

from

Mumbai,

Mumbai

suburban,

Thane

and

Raigad

districts.

The

challenge

is

also

to

an order passed by the Respondent in statutory appeal

preferred by the Petitioner.

... 2 ...

2.

The learned Advocate for the Petitioner

submitted

that

the

impugned

orders

are

illegal.

He

submitted

that

in

any

event

all

the

prejudicial

activities

alleged

against

the

Petitioner

were

confined

to

Mumbai

sub-urban

district

and

therefore,

the

order

of

externment

which

extends

to

Thane

and

Raigad

districts

is

excessive.

He

placed

reliance

on

decision

of

this

court

in

the

case

of

Ganpat

@

Ganesh

Tanaji

Ganpat

@

Ganesh

Tanaji

Ganpat

@

Ganesh

Tanaji

Katare

Katare

Katare

Vs.

Assistant

Commissioner

of

Police

&

Ors.

Vs.

Assistant

Commissioner

of

Police

&

Ors.

Vs.

Assistant

Commissioner

of

Police

&

Ors.

(2005

(2005

(2005

ALLMR(Cri.)

Page

2717)

ALLMR(Cri.)

Page

2717)

ALLMR(Cri.)

Page

2717).

The

learned

A.P.P.

supported the impugned order by pointing out the

grounds on which the said order has been passed.

3.

I have considered the submissions. The perusal

of

the

show-cause

notice

indicates

that

there

are

three

offences

registered

against

the

Petitioner

at

Samta

Nagar

Police

Station,

Mumbai.

Reliance

has

been

placed

on

in-camera

statements

of

two

witnesses.

The

allegations

made

by

the

said

witnesses

are

regarding

prejudicial

activities

of

the

Petitioner

in

Mumbai

suburban

district.

The

impugned

order

mentions

that

easy

and

modes

of

transport

are

available

for

entering

Mumbai

from

Thane,

Raigad

districts

and

therefore,

the

order of externment was being extended to the said

districts.

... 3 ...

4.

In the case of Ganpat @ Ganesh Tanaji Katare

(Supra)

this

court

held

that

there

is

intimate

connection

between

Mumbai

and

Thane

districts

as

accepted

by

the

Apex

Court

in

the

case

of

Pandharinath

Pandharinath

Pandharinath

Shridhar

Shridhar

Shridhar

Rangnekar

Vs.

Deputy

Commissioner

of

Police

Rangnekar

Vs.

Deputy

Commissioner

of

Police

Rangnekar

Vs.

Deputy

Commissioner

of

Police

((1973)

((1973)

((1973)

1

Supreme

Court

Cases

Page

372)

1

Supreme

Court

Cases

P