Advocates:
['MIR NAGMAN ALI', 'RAHUL M NIKURERAHUL M NIKURE', 'RAHUL M NIKURE', 'APP FOR R-1', '2']

1

IN THE COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR

Criminal Writ Petition No. 337/2018

(Mohsin Khan Habib khan and others vs. The State of Maharashtra another )

..........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

Office Notes, Office Memoranda of

Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's order

of directions and Registrar's orders

..............................................................................................................................................

Mr. Mir Nagman Ali, Adocate for petitioner

Mr. Anand Fulzele, Additional Public Prosecutor for respondents

CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK &

MRS. SWAPNA JOSHI, JJ.

DATED : 27^th April, 2018.

Heard.

By this Writ Petition, the petitioners challenge the

order of the Deputy Commissioner of Police, Amravati,

dated 31.08.2017 externing the petitioners as members of

the gang from Amravati city and Amravati rural areas for

a period of two years.

The learned counsel for the petitioners states that in

all four members of the gang were externed from Amravati

by the impugned order dated 31.08.2017 and Wasim Khan

@ Bablu - one of the members against whom the

externment order was passed, has succeeded in the

Criminal Writ Petition filed by him for quashing and setting

aside the order of the externing authority dated 31.08.2017.

Inter alia, it is stated that neither the copies of the in-

camera statements of the witnesses were supplied to the

2

petitioners nor was the gist of the in-camera statement

mentioned/supplied in the show-cause notice. It is stated

that in the absence of the gist of the in-camera statements

of the witnesses on which the externing authority has

relied on for passing the impugned order, the petitioners

could not have filed an effective reply.

On hearing the learned learned counsel for the

parties, we find that in the case of Wasim Khan @ Bablu,

we have allowed Criminal Writ Petition No.259/2018 filed

by him against the common order of externment, that is

impugned in this writ petition and the said order was

quashed in respect of Wasim Khan. We have observed in

the order dated 27^th March 2018 that since the gist of the

in-camera statement of the witnesses was not supplied to

the petitioner therein viz, Wasim Khan @ Bablu , he could

not have effectively replied to the show-cause notice. In the

instant case also, we find that the gist of the in-camera

statements of the witnesses was not mentioned in the show

cause notice and the same was also not supplied to the

petitioners. In the absence of the gist of the in-camera

statements of the witnesses, the petitioners were not able

to file an effective reply to the show-cause notice.

Hence, for the reasons aforesaid, the Criminal Writ

Petition is allowed. The impugned order is quashed and set

aside. Order accordingly.

JUDGE

JUDGE

sahare