Banty S/O. Ramdas Larokar vs State Of Maharashtra Thr. Sub ...
2017 Latest Caselaw 9363 Bom

                                                  1                                       jg.cri.wp.972.17.odt


                 THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                         NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR.

                    CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 972 OF 2017

Banty S/o Ramdas Larokar
Age : 27 yrs ; Occu. : Laborer
R/o Ambadevi Ward, Ekarjuma, 
Dist. Chandrapur - 442907                                                                       ... Petitioner

             VERSUS

State of Maharashtra
Through Sub-Divisional Magistrate ; 
Warora (Chandrapur)                                                                          ... Respondent
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shri A. C. Jaltare, Advocate for the petitioner
Shri S. S. Doifode, Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  CORAM : R. K. DESHPANDE AND
                                                                M. G. GIRATKAR, JJ.

                                                   DATE    : 06/12/2017.

Oral Judgment                 (Per : R. K. Deshpande, J.)

Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent

of the learned counsels appearing for the parties.

2. The order of externment passed under Section 56(1)(a)(b)

of the Maharashtra Police Act externing the petitioner for a period of

two years from the City of Chandrapur is the subject matter of

challenge. The order takes into consideration not only the offences of

2 jg.cri.wp.972.17.odt

Indian Penal Code but also the offences under the Maharashtra

Prohibition Act, the Maharashtra Police Act, the Criminal Procedure

Code and the Arms Act. In-camera statements have been recorded were

not referred to in the show cause notice and these facts are not at all

disputed.

3. In view of the facts that the order takes into consideration

extraneous offences and fails to provide an opportunity to the petitioner

to provide his explanation in respect of in-camera statements which

were not referred to in the show cause notice, we have no option but to

set aside the impugned order.

4. In the result, the writ petition is allowed. The order dated

31-7-2017 passed by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Warora is quashed

and set aside.

5. Rule is made absolute in aforesaid terms with no order as to

costs.

                        JUDGE                                     JUDGE



wasnik