Bombay High Court
Raju Madhavrao Kendre And Another vs The State Of Maharashtra And Others on 5 August, 2025
2025:BHC-AUG:20703
1 Cri.W.P. 1779-2024.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 1779 OF 2024
1. Raju s/o Madhavrao Kendre,
Age : 43 years, Occu. : Agri.
2. Satyam s/o Raju Kendre,
Age : 22 years, Occu. Agri.
Both R/o. Shellali, Tq. Kandhar,
Dist. Nanded .. Petitioners
Versus
1. The State of Maharashtra,
Through Kandhar Police Station,
Tq. Kandhar, Dist. Nanded.
2. Divisonal Commissioner,
Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar,
Commissioner Office
Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar.
3. The Superintendent of Police,
Nanded, Tq. and Dist. Nanded.
4. The Sub Divisional Officer of Police,
Kandhar, Sub Division Kandhar,
Tq. Kandhar, Dist. Nanded. .. Respondents
Mr. Govind G. Suryawanshi, Advocate for the Petitioners.
Mr. R. B. Dhaware, AGP for Respondent Nos. 1 to 4.
CORAM : KISHORE C. SANT, J.
Date on which reserved for order : 31st July, 2025.
Date on which order pronounced : 05th August, 2025.
1 of 9
2 Cri.W.P. 1779-2024.odt
FINAL ORDER :-
. This petition arises out of the proceedings under Section
56(1)(b) of the Maharashtra Police Act wherein, the action of
externment is taken against the present petitioners by the learned
Superintendent of Police (S.P.), Nanded by order dated
02.07.2024. The petitioners came to be externed from two
districts i.e. Nanded and Latur for a period of one year from the
date of order. In an appeal the said order came to be confirmed
by the learned Divisional Commissioner and thus, the petitioners
are before this Court.
2. The action was taken considering four offences against the
petitioners. The Police prepared report and sent the proposal to
the learned S.P. considering the criminal record against the
petitioners. The offences pending against the petitioners are as
below :
Sr. Crime No. Sections
No.
1. 03/2022 Sections 452, 323, 354, 354-B, 143,
147, 148, 149, 504, 506, 427 of the
I.P.C.
2. 109/2023 Sections 395, 324, 336, 452, 143, 147,
148, 149, 504, 506 of the I.P.C.
2 of 9
3 Cri.W.P. 1779-2024.odt
3. Chapter cases filed against the petitioner No. 1 are as
below :
Sr. Chapter Sections
No. Case No.
1. 19/2022 Sections 107 of the Cr.P.C.
2. 31/2023 Section 110 (e)(g) of the Cr. P.C.
4. Chapter cases filed against the petitioner No. 2 are as
below :
Sr. Chapter Sections
No. Case No.
1. 01/2022 Section 110 (e)(g) of the Cr. P.C.
2. 32/2023 Section 110 (e)(g) of the Cr. P.C.
5. The learned S.P. on the basis of report and a proposal issued
notice dated 22.04.2024 directing the petitioners to appear before
him on 29.04.2024 at 11.00 a.m. The petitioners appeared and
submitted say and it is on this the action came to be taken.
6. It is the case of the petitioners that, the petitioners were not
given all the documents on the basis of which action was proposed
to be taken. The offences are registered because of political
rivalry. Only two cases are pending against the petitioners
whereas, two proceedings are already closed. The petitioner No. 1
3 of 9
4 Cri.W.P. 1779-2024.odt
is father of petitioner No. 2. It is a conspiracy to implicate both
the members of the family as another son of the petitioner No. 1 is
elected as Sarpanch of the village. The petitioners prayed that no
action be taken against them.
7. The learned S.P. considered the say, proposal and the record.
It is observed that, there are offences pending against the
petitioners. He further recorded that, record is sufficient to show
that the crimes are organized crimes. They are members of a gang
and passed an order. The learned Commissioner considered the
appeal and recorded that the material before the authority was
sufficient to take action of externment and rejected the appeal.
8. The learned advocate for the petitioners vehemently argued
that, present case is a case where from the record it is seen that,
no sufficient material is available on record and still action is
taken. Both the authorities have failed to appreciate that the
Crime Nos. 3/2022 and 109/2023 are pending trial. No
conviction is recorded. Against both the petitioners two chapter
cases were initiated, however, both the chapter cases are closed.
It is submitted that, there is no conviction recorded against any of
4 of 9
5 Cri.W.P. 1779-2024.odt
the petitioners in any of the crimes. No secret statements appear
to have been recorded and still the action is taken restricting
fundamental right of the petitioners. Though the period of
externment is already over, still to remove the stigma it is
necessary to hear the petitioners. The petitioners have prayed for
quashing and setting aside the impugned order and the action of
externment.
9. The State has filed affidavit in reply. The learned A.P.P.
submits that, the action is rightly taken against the petitioners.
Another son of petitioner No. 1 is elected Sarpanch of the village.
Thus, there is every possibility of the petitioners taking
disadvantage of the position of the Sarpanch from their family. He
has placed on record the report submitted by the Police Inspector,
Police Station, Kandhar. He submits that, in the report the learned
Inspector has considered entire material and it is only thereafter
the report was filed. The learned A.P.P. has placed on record secret
statements along with reply. There are five secret statements.
However, looking to the statements also it is seen that, except two
crimes and two chapter cases against the petitioners, there is no
another case. The statements appear to be stereotype. This
5 of 9
6 Cri.W.P. 1779-2024.odt
cannot be said to be sufficient to come to a conclusion that the
activities are so dangerous that it is not desirable to allow the
petitioners to stay in district.
10. The learned advocate for the petitioners during the course of
argument relied upon the judgment in the case of Deepak s/o
Laxman Dongre Vs. The State of Maharashtra & Ors. in Criminal
Appeal No. 139/2022. The Hon'ble Apex Court observed that, an
order of externment is an extra ordinary measure. It has the effect
of depriving a citizen of his fundamental right of free movement
throughout the territory of India. In practical terms such order
prevents the person even from staying in his own house. For
taking action under Section under Section 56 (1)(a) there must be
objective material on record on the basis of which the competent
authority must record its subjective satisfaction. This Court finds
that, the said judgment is squarely applicable in the facts of the
present case.
11. After hearing the parties and going through the material on
record it is seen that, in two offences both the petitioners are
shown as accused. So far as chapter cases are concerned, there are
6 of 9
7 Cri.W.P. 1779-2024.odt
independent chapter cases filed against each of the petitioners.
Crime Nos. 3/2022 and 109/2023 are pending before the Court.
There is no conviction recorded as yet. Crime No. 3/2022 is for
the offences punishable under Sections 452, 323, 354, 354-B, 143,
147, 148, 149, 504, 506 and 427 of the I.P.C. Crime No.
109/2023 is filed for the offences punishable under Sections 395,
324, 336, 452, 143, 147, 148, 149, 504 and 506 of the I.P.C.
While considering the action of externment it needs to be
considered as to whether this much record is sufficient for taking
drastic action of externment from two districts. All the offences
are from one Police Station i.e. Kandhar.
12. Looking to the order passed by the learned S.P. it is seen that
he has mainly considered the enquiry report submitted by the Sub
Divisional Police Officer, Sub Division, Kandhar. The notice was
issued. Say is filed by the petitioners. It is considered that there
are two offences lodged from the year 2012 till 2023 falling under
Chapter 16 and 17 of the I.P.C. There is nothing to indicate as to
what exact material lead him to conclusion that the activities of
the petitioners are dangerous to the society. It is considered that
the offences are registered on account of the elections to the
7 of 9
8 Cri.W.P. 1779-2024.odt
village panchayat. It is not clear as to on what basis the authority
came to conclusion that there is danger to the life and property of
the people and passed an order externing the petitioners for six
months.
13. The learned Divisional Commissioner in his judgment
mainly considered the order passed by the learned S.P. on the
basis of report submitted by learned Sub Divisional Police Officer.
Though it is recorded that two secret statements are recorded,
however, looking to the order passed by the learned S.P., no such
reasoning is appearing in his order. The observation of the
learned Divisional Commissioner thus appears to be without
application of mind. From the order it is also not seen as to what
made the learned Commissioner to come to the conclusion that
the activities of the petitioners are so dangerous that they are
required to be externed. Considering the above, this Court finds
that, the action is taken without there being sufficient material on
record.
14. In any case, this Court finds that, an order is also excessive
as offences are registered only in one Police Station. The action is
8 of 9
9 Cri.W.P. 1779-2024.odt
taken externing them from two districts. In view of the above, the
impugned order deserves to be quashed and set aside.
15. In view of the above, criminal writ petition stands allowed
in terms of prayer clause (C).
16. Criminal writ petition stands disposed of.
( KISHORE C. SANT, J. )
P.S.B.
9 of 9
