Sayyad Akhil Sayyad Khamsu vs The Deputy Police Comm. Amravti, ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 14291 Bom

                                                     1                     crwp603.21.odt

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

                  CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 603/2021

      Sayyad Akhil Sayyad Khamsu,
      aged 37 years, occ. Labour,
      r/o Shivaji Nagar, Badnera,
      Amravait, Tq. Dist. Amravait.                           .....PETITIONER

                               ...V E R S U S...

 1. Deputy Police Commissioner,
    Amravati, Tq. Dist. Amravati,
    Zone 1.

 2. Assistant Police Commissioner,
    Frezarpura Division, Amravati City.

 3. Police Station Officer, Badnera,
    Tq. Dist. Badnera.

 4. Divisional Commissioner, Amravati.                        ...RESPONDENTS
 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Mr. S. I. Ghatte, Advocate for petitioner.
 Mr. T. A. Mirza, A.P.P. for respondents.
 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                CORAM:- V. M. DESHPANDE AND
                                               AMIT B. BORKAR, JJ.
                                DATE:-         OCTOBER 1, 2021

 ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: Amit B. Borkar, J.)

 1.             By this petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the

 Constitution of India, the petitioner is challenging order dated

 15.06.2021 passed by respondent no.1 and order dated

 03.08.2021 passed by respondent no.4 thereby confirming order

 dated 15.06.2021 passed by respondent no. 1.




::: Uploaded on - 01/10/2021                                 ::: Downloaded on - 02/10/2021 10:12:32 :::
                                            2                     crwp603.21.odt

 2.             A show cause notice dated 21.05.2021 was issued to

 the petitioner under Section 56 (1)(a)(b) of the Bombay Police

 Act.     In the said show cause notice, the authority mentioned

 following offences:

  Sr.No. Crime No.                             Offences
  1.         128/2017                          326, 504, 34 IPC
  2.         208/2014                          324, 504, 506 IPC
  3.         180/2018                          324, 504, 506 IPC
  4.         750/2019                          12 (A) MPGA




 3.             The petitioner replied to the said notice stating that the

 petitioner has been falsely implicated in the said offence. It is

 stated that from 2018, there are no bodily offences registered

 against the petitioner. The externing authority, by order dated

 15.06.2021 externed the petitioner for the period of two years

 from Amravati city and Amravati rural area.                  The petitioner,

 therefore, filed appeal before Divisional Commissioner, Amravati

 vide Appeal No.85/MPA,1951/u/s 60/Ext./G.B.-7/2021/Amravati

 which came to be dismissed by order dated 03.08.2021.                        The

 petitioner has therefore filed the present petition. This Court on

 27.08.2021 issued notice to the respondents. Respondent no.1

 has filed reply dated 03.09.2021 justifying the order passed

 against the petitioner.




::: Uploaded on - 01/10/2021                       ::: Downloaded on - 02/10/2021 10:12:32 :::
                                            3                  crwp603.21.odt

 4.             We have heard Mr. Gatte, learned Advocate for the

 petitioner and Mr. Mirza, learned A.P.P. for respondents. Learned

 Advocate for petitioner invited our attention to the offences

 mentioned in the order externing the petitioner. He stated that

 after 2018, there is no bodily offence against the petitioner and

 there is no live link of offence committed by the petitioner and

 initiation of cause for externment. He also invited our attention to

 the fact that the offences were registered in only one police station

 and the order of externment is for entire Amravati District.



 5.             Mr. Mirza, learned A.P.P. supported the impugned

 order stating that offence against the petitioner are serious and

 therefore externing authority is justified in externing petitioner.



 6.             We have carefully considered the impugned order

 passed by the externing authority and confirmed by the appellate

 authority. Out of four offences, last offence is under Section 12A

 of the Gambling Act and remaining offences were registered in the

 year 2014. Last bodily offence registered against the petitioner is

 of the year 2018 and the show cause notice issued to him on

 21.05.2021.         Hence, we are satisfied that there is no live link




::: Uploaded on - 01/10/2021                    ::: Downloaded on - 02/10/2021 10:12:32 :::
                                              4                   crwp603.21.odt

 between last bodily offence committed by the petitioner and the

 initiation of action of externment. We, therefore, pass the

 following order.

                               ORDER

(i) The writ petition is allowed.

(ii) Impugned order dated 03.08.2021 passed by respondent no.4 in Appeal No. 85/MPA,1951/u/s 60/Ext./G.B.-7/2021/Amravati and order dated 15.06.2021 passed by respondent no.1 are quashed and set aside.

Rule is made absolute.

                      JUDGE                              JUDGE



 kahale