Bombay High Court
Anup S/O Tejpal Agrawal vs Deputy Commissioner Of Police ... on 4 August, 2022
Bench: V. G. Joshi
Judgment 1 10-Cri.W.P.No.450.2022.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 450 OF 2022
Anup S/o Tejpal Agrawal
Aged 33 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 04.05.2022 passed under
Section 56 (1)(a)(b) of the Maharashtra Police Act, 1951 (for short
Judgment 2 10-Cri.W.P.No.450.2022.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. The petitioner was served with a
show cause notice stating proposed externment to be initiated against
him. The petitioner replied to the show cause notice, however,
impugned action has been taken. The challenge is on the ground that
the Externing Authority though considered total 11 offences however,
out of them offences at serial Nos.1 to 5 were already considered as a
foundation of externment order which was passed on 17.10.2018 thus,
it is the contention that the same offences cannot be re-considered for
initiating fresh action of externment. Moreover, it is submitted that
offences at serial Nos.6 to 10 relates to the same episode as they are
successively registered within a week. It is submitted that offences at
serial Nos.6 to 10 does not fall under the Chapter XII, XVI or XVII of
the Indian Penal Code and thus it cannot be considered. The impugned
order is challenged on the ground that in-camera statements are not
verified by the Externing Authority.
Judgment 3 10-Cri.W.P.No.450.2022.odt
4. The challenge is also on the ground that the order is
excessive as the crimes are registered only at Rajapeth Police Station.
It is also one of the ground of challenge that there is no justification as
to why the externment order is for maximum permissible period of two
years. It is submitted that the Externing Authority has not verified the
correctness of in-camera statements, as it does not reflect in the
impugned order.
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 to 9 of the order,
which appears to be of general in nature. However, portion mentioned
in paragraph Nos.6 to 8 cannot be termed as a reasons in true sense.
Paragraph No.9 is in generalized form which also does not reflect an
application of mind. 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
Judgment 4 10-Cri.W.P.No.450.2022.odt
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
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
