High Court Quashes Externment Order against Shiv Sena party members [Read Order]

Bombay high court quashes order of state police authorities, external Shiv Sena party members from the district of Rahata, stating that “it is evident that the impugned order suffers from the vice of arbitrariness.”

Facts

 Petitioner 1, a social worker, and petitioner 2, an active member of shiv sena party, allegedly became dangerous and harmful to the society as they were allegedly running a gang and were armed with knives. It was further alleged that they were assaulting people including doctors and government servants and six offenses were registered against them relating to human body and property, which led to the externment proceedings where they denied all allegations and claimed that proceedings were initiated by their political rivals. The special divisional police officer directed the petitioners to be externed for 2 years from Ahmednagar district which led to the writ petition filed in the high court.

Petitioner’s Contention

 The petitioner’s counsel argued that extraneous material was considered by the respondents which itself was ground enough to set aside the order. The counsel further contended that no such action was taken against other members of the alleged gang. He also argued that his clients were acquitted in two of the cases but those cases were also taken in consideration by the authorities and that petitioners being externed from the entire district were excessive and without any reason.

 Respondent’s Reply

 The respondent argued that the petitioners were dangerous and harmful to the society and that they have created a reign of terror in the locality, due to which people were not coming forward to depose against them. The respondents contended that the externment was rightful and essential for peace and harmony in society.

Court’s Order

The court conceded to the fact that the petitioners were acquitted in two of the six cases in the show cause list and said, “When a competent Criminal Court has acquitted the petitioners, there was no reason for the Externing Authority to consider these cases for the externment of the petitioners.” The court further questioned the time period of 5 years between the cases and the sudden proceeding of externment. The court also observed that the respondent considered two cases outside of the show cause list and also failed to mention the alleged gang members in the show cause notice and questioned the existence of the gang stating “there is no evidence to show that petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 have formed a gang of which they are leaders. The Externing Officer has neither mentioned the names of other gang members nor is any action initiated against any of the gang members.” the court further remarked that the externment order was excessive and could not sustain without any reason. The court stated that the order suffered from the vice or arbitrariness and thus quashed the externment of the petitioners.

Read Order @Latestlaws.com