Vishal S/O Raju Tejwal vs State Of Maharashtra, Thr. The ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 16492 Bom

                                                    1                       1.Cri.W.P.No.741.21.doc

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

                CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 741 OF 2021

 Vishal S/o. Raju Tejwal,
 Age : 28 years, Occ. - Labour,
 Both R/o. Athwadi Bazar,
 Guruwar Peth, Patur.                                                  ... PETITIONER

                   ----VERSUS----

 1.     State of Maharashtra,
        through the Secretary,
        Ministry of Home Affairs,
        Mantralaya, Mumbai - 32.

 2.     Divisional Commissioner,
        Amravati Division, Amravati.

 3.     Superintendent of Police,
        Akola, Tq. & Distt. Akola.

 4.     Sub-Divisional Police Officer,
        Murtijapur, Tq. Murtijapur,
        Distt. Akola.

 5.     Police Station Officer, P. S. Patur,
        Tq. Patur, Distt. Akola.                                   ... RESPONDENTS

 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Mr. D. S. Patil, Advocate for Petitioner.
 Mr. T. A. Mirza, Additional Public Prosecutor for Respondents/State.
 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          CORAM :              M. S. SONAK AND
                               PUSHPA V. GANEDIWALA, JJ.

DATE : 29.11.2021.

ORAL JUDGMENT : (PER M. S. SONAK, J.)

1. Heard Mr. D. S. Patil, learned Counsel for the petitioner

and Mr. T. A. Mirza, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the

respondents/State.

2. Rule. The rule is made returnable forthwith at the

request of and with the consent of the learned Counsel for the

parties.

3. The challenge in this petition is to the orders dated

07.04.2021 and 29.07.2021 externing the petitioner by invoking

the provisions of Section 55 of the Maharashtra Police Act, 1951

(said Act).

4. By the orders impugned in this petition, the present

petitioner and his brother Vinod were ordered to be externed. In

Criminal Writ Petition No.650/2021 instituted by the petitioner's

brother Vinod Raju Tejwal, we found that the gang in question

comprised about 4 to 5 persons but, the externment orders were

made only against the present petitioner and Vinod. Therefore, by

following the earlier precedents, we allow Criminal Writ Petition

No.650/2021 by our judgment and order dated 28.10.2021. The

reasoning reflected in our judgment and order will apply both on

fact as well as law to the issues raised in the present petition as

well.

5. Therefore, by adopting the reasoning in our judgment

and order dated 28.10.2021 in Criminal Writ Petition

No.650/2021, we allow this petition and set aside the impugned

externment orders.

6. The rule is made absolute in the aforesaid terms. There

shall be no order for costs.

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

PUSHPA V. GANEDIWALA, J. M. S. SONAK, J.

RGurnule