Parag Chandrashekhar Chimote vs Deputy Commissioner Of Police ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 7655 Bom

Judgment                          1                  11-Cri.W.P.No.452.2022.odt




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

             CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 452 OF 2022


      Parag Chandrashekhar Chimote,
      Aged 39 years, Occ. - Private Service,
      R/o. Rajapeth, Amravati,
      Tq. & District - Amravati.                  .... PETITIONER


                             // VERSUS //

1)    Deputy Commissioner of Police,
      Zone 2, Amravati,
      Tq. & Dist. Amravati.

2)   The Divisional Commissioner,
     Amravati Division, Amravati           .... RESPONDENTS
______________________________________________________________
     Mr. P.R. Agrawal, Advocate for petitioner.
     Mr. S.M. Ukey, Additional Public Prosecutor for respondents.
______________________________________________________________


                  CORAM : VINAY JOSHI, J.

DATED : AUGUST 04, 2022

ORAL JUDGMENT :

1. Heard. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally

by consent of the learned counsel appearing for the parties.

2. The petitioner has been externed for a period of two years

from entire Amravati district vide order dated 06.05.2022 passed under

Section 56 (1)(a)(b) of the Maharashtra Police Act, 1951 (for short Judgment 2 11-Cri.W.P.No.452.2022.odt

"the Police Act". The petitioner has challenged the said order in a

statutory appeal under Section 60 of the Police Act, however, the

Appellate Authority has dismissed the appeal, which is impugned

herein along with original order.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner has assailed both the

impugned orders on various grounds. It is argued that initially the

petitioner was served with a show cause notice dated 10.03.2022 about

proposed externment which did not contain any reference of in-camera

statements. The petitioner has replied the said notice on which, the

said proceedings was dropped. Later on, the petitioner was served

with another show cause notice in proximity stating the proposed

externment action to be initiated on the basis of six prior offences. It is

argued that first five offences were pertaining to Section 188 of the

Indian Penal Code, however, the police have also inserted a Section 341

to bring the action within Chapter 16 of the Indian Penal Code. It is

the submission that all these offences allegedly occurred within a short

span of one week relating to installation of idol. According to the

petitioner, there are no prior offences however, on the basis of the said

solitary movement of installation of idol, multiple offences have been

registered which has formed basis for externment action.

Judgment 3 11-Cri.W.P.No.452.2022.odt

4. The another ground of challenge is about non-application

of mind as regard to in-camera statements. It is pointed out that the

externing authority has not verified the correctness regarding

in-camera statements as it does not reflect in the order of externment.

It is submitted that the out of six, five offences are registered at

Rajapeth Police Station and thus there was no threat to the society.

5. While assailing the appellate order, it is primly canvassed

that there is total non-application of mind on the part of the Authority.

The reasoning part finds place in paragraph Nos.6 and 7 of the order,

which appears to be of general in nature. The appeal filed under

Section 60 raises several grounds on facts as well as on law. The

statutory provision of appeal has been made with a purpose that the

higher authority shall reasses the entire material, hear the proposed

externee and pass the order on his satisfaction. The order passed by

the Divisional Commissioner lacks the reason which is against the

principles of natural justice.

6. In the circumstances, the Writ Petition deserves to be

allowed. The impugned order passed by Appellate Authority dated

22.06.2022 is hereby quashed and set aside. The appeal is restored on

the file of respondent No.2 for fresh decision. The petitioner shall

appear before the Appellate Authority on 10.08.2022 or through his Judgment 4 11-Cri.W.P.No.452.2022.odt

counsel. The appeal shall be decided within a period of one month

from the appearance of the petitioner before the Appellate Authority.

7. The Writ Petition is allowed and disposed of. Rule is made

absolute in the aforesaid terms. No costs.

(VINAY JOSHI, J.)

Kirtak

Digitally Signed By:KIRTAK BHIMRAO JANARDHAN Signing Date:05.08.2022 15:39