Sheikh Saddam Sheikh Gani vs The Police Superintendent , Akola ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 12009 Bom

 Judgment                              1                                    wp525.21



          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
                    NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.


                  CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 525/2021


          Sheikh Saddam Sheikh Gani,
          Aged 30 years, Occ. Labour,
          R/o. Farshi Chowk, Borgaon,
          Manju, Tq. Dist. Akola
                                                            .... PETITIONER

                                   // VERSUS //

 1]       Police Superintendent,
          Akola

 2]       Divisional Commissioner,
          Amravati
                                                        .... RESPONDENTS

 ********************************************************************
               Shri S.I. Ghatte, Advocate for the petitioner
               Shri V.A. Thakare, APP for the respondents
 ********************************************************************

                    CORAM : V.M. DESHPANDE & AMIT B. BORKAR, JJ.

AUGUST 27, 2021

JUDGMENT : (PER:- AMIT B. BORKAR, J.)

1] Heard. RULE. Rule made returnable forthwith.

2] By this petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the

Constitution of India, the petitioner is challenging the order passed by

ANSARI

Judgment 2 wp525.21

the respondent no. 1 dated 12/04/2021 and the order passed by the

respondent no. 2 dated 17/06/2021 thereby externing the petitioner

from the entire Akola District under Section 55 of the Maharashtra

Police Act.

3] The petitioner was served with the show cause notice dated

20/02/2021 under Section 55 of the Maharashtra Police Act. The

petitioner was called upon to explain as to why he should not be externed

from entire Akola District for period of 2 years for the commission of

offences stated in the said show cause notice.

4] The petitioner submitted his reply dated 18/03/2021

explaining that he has been falsely implicated and the crimes are

registered against him only because he belongs to Muslim community.

The petitioner was thereafter again served with the show cause notice

dated 07/04/2021 thereby calling upon the petitioner to explain as to

why he should not be externed from Akola District. The petitioner

submitted his reply dated 12/04/2021. The respondent no. 1 by the

order dated 12/04/2021 passed an order externing the petitioner along

with two other persons from entire District of Akola for period of 2

years.

 ANSARI


  Judgment                               3                                    wp525.21




 5]               The petitioner being aggrieved by the order dated

12/04/2021 filed Appeal No. 42 of 2021 which is dismissed by the

impugned order dated 17/06/2021. The petitioner has therefore filed the

present petition challenging the impugned orders dated 12/04/2021 and

17/06/2021.

6] This Court by the order dated 26/07/2021 issued notices to

the respondents. The respondent no. 1 in pursuance of the notice issued

by this Court has filed reply stating that the Investigating Agency has

recorded the statements of secret witnesses and on perusal of the same, it

appears that the petitioner along with other accused persons is involved

in theft of cow and running a gang to do illegal activities and therefore

there is fear in the mind of people in the area and no one is coming

forward to give report or statement against the present petitioner.

Therefore, the impugned orders are fully justified.

7] Learned advocate for the petitioner, relying on the Full

Bench judgment of this Court in the case of Sumit S/o Ramkrishna

Maraskolhe vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Police, Zone - 1, Nagpur and

anr. reported in 2019(2) Mh.L.J. 745 and also on un-reported judgement

ANSARI

Judgment 4 wp525.21

of this Court in Criminal Writ Petition No. 405/2021 (Vijay S/o

Digambar Thorat vs. The State of Maharashtra & ors.) submitted that the

Externing Authority while recording the subjective satisfaction at the

time of passing of order of externment, should apply its mind about

geographical proximity of the offence committed by the externee.

8] In the light of the principles laid down by the Full Bench of

this Court in the case of Sumit Maraskolhe (supra), we have scrutinized

the impugned orders passed by the Externing Authority and the

Appellate Authority. We have also carefully scrutinized the show cause

notices issued to the petitioner. On scrutiny of the show cause notices

and the impugned orders, it appears that all the offences registered

against the petitioner are registered in only one Police Station Borgaon

Manju. In the externment orders passed by the respondents, the

Externing Authority and the Appellate Authority have not recorded

subjective satisfaction as to why the petitioner has been externed from

the area larger than Taluka Borgaon Manju. In absence of application of

mind of the Externing Authority and the Appellate Authority on the

geographical proximity of the offences committed by the petitioner, in

our opinion, the orders passed by the Externing Authority & the

Appellate Authority suffer from virus of excessiveness. We therefore find

ANSARI

Judgment 5 wp525.21

substance in the submission on behalf of the petitioner that the

Externing Authority should have externed the petitioner only from

Taluka Borgaon Manju. We are therefore satisfied that the order of

externment passed by the respondent no. 1 - Externing Authority is

required to be modified to the extent of restricting the externment of

petitioner restricted to the area of Taluka Borgaon Manju.

9] Hence, the following order is passed :-

The order of externment passed by the respondent no. 1

dated 12/04/2021 is modified by externing the petitioner

from Taluka Borgaon Manju, District Akola for period of

one year.

Rule is made partly absolute in the above terms. Pending

application(s), if any, stand(s) disposed of.

                   (JUDGE)                                  (JUDGE)




 ANSARI