Sheikh Shakeel Akil Sheikh vs The State Of Maharashtra Others
2025 Latest Caselaw 1447 Bom

Bombay High Court

Sheikh Shakeel Akil Sheikh vs The State Of Maharashtra Others on 5 August, 2025

Ethape                               (1)               Cri.-WP-539-2025


             IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                        BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 539 OF 2025

Sheikh Shakeel S/o. Akil Sheikh
Age: 43 years, Occu: Labourer,
R/o. New Jogeshwari, Tal. Gangapur,
Dist. Chhatrpati Sambhajinagar,
Now residing at Newasa Phata,
Near Gadge Baba High Court,
Tal. Newasa, Dist. Ahmednagar.                       ...PETITIONER

              VERSUS

1]       The Inspector of Police,
         Police Station MIDC Waluj,
         Dist. Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar.

2]       The Deputy Commissioner of Police,
         Circle-I, Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar.

3]       The Divisional Commissioner,
         Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar.                  ...RESPONDENTS


Mr. Abid R. Shaikh, Advocate for the Petitioner.
Mr. R. B. Dhaware, APP for Respondent-State.

                             CORAM              : KISHORE C. SANT, J.
                             RESERVED ON   : 17th JULY 2025.
                             PRONOUNCED ON : 5th AUGUST 2025.
 Ethape                                 (2)                  Cri.-WP-539-2025


ORDER :

-

1. Heard Mr. Shaikh, the learned Advocate for the Petitioner, and

Mr. Dhaware, the learned APP for Respondent-State. The petitioner is

heard finally at the stage of admission with the consent of the parties.

2. This petition arises out of an order dated 27 th December 2024,

passed by the learned Divisional Commissioner, Chhatrapati

Sambhajinagar, in Externment Appeal, thereby confirming the order

dated 17th October 2024, passed by learned Deputy Commissioner of

Police, Circle-I, Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar, externing the petitioner for

two years from Chh. Sambhajinagar city and district under the

provisions of Section 56(1)(b) of the Maharashtra Police Act, 1951.

3. The facts, in short, are that the petitioner is residing at Jogeshwari

Zopadpatti, Ambedkarnagar, Taluka Gangapur District Chhatrapati

Sambhajinagar. Following offences are pending against the petitioner:-

Sr. Police Crime No. and Sections Date of Status No. Station Registration of Crime.

 Ethape                            (3)              Cri.-WP-539-2025



1.       MIDC    C.R. No. 815/2024, U/s. 11/09/2024 Under
         Waluj   191(1), 221, 189(2), 190 of        Investigation
                 IPC r/w Section 37(3), 37(1) of
                 Mh. Police Act.
2.       MIDC    C. R. No. 308/2024,     U/s. 11/04/2024      Pending
         Waluj   65(B) of the Mh. Prohibition
                 Act.
3.       MIDC    C.R. No.337/2023 U/s. 307, 25/04/2023        Pending
         Waluj   323, 504, 506 r/w 34 of IPC
                 and Sec. 3(1), 3(1)(s) of SC
                 and ST Act.
4.       MIDC    C.R. No.417/2019 U/s. 324, 10/06/2019        Pending
         Waluj   323, 504, 506 of IPC.
5.       MIDC    C.R. No.440/2021 U/s. 65(B) 05/05/2021       Pending
         Waluj   of Mh. Prohibition Act.
6.       MIDC    C.R. No.999/2021 U/s. 65(B) 03/10/2021       Pending
         Waluj   of Mh. Prohibition Act.
7.       MIDC    C.R. No.1062/2021 U/s. 65(B) 27/10/2021      Pending
         Waluj   of Mh. Prohibition Act.
8.       MIDC    C.R. No.237/2022 U/s. 65(B) 18/03/2022       Pending
         Waluj   of Mh. Prohibition Act.
9.       MIDC    C.R. No.340/2022 U/s. 65(B) 09/04/2022       Pending
         Waluj   of the Mh. Prohibition Act.
10.      MIDC    C.R. No. 606/2022 U/s. 65(B) 04/07/2022      Pending
         Waluj   of Mh. Prohibition Act.
11.      MIDC    NC No.605/2022 U/s. 323, 504 19/03/2022         ---
         Waluj   of IPC.
12.      MIDC    NC No.1539/2022 U/s. 323, 14/07/2022            ---
         Waluj   504 r/w 34 of IPC.
                             Preventive Action
 Ethape                               (4)                  Cri.-WP-539-2025



13.      MIDC    Proposal No.35/2021 u/s. 93 of 01/12/2021              ---
         Waluj   Mh. Prohibition Act.
14.      MIDC    Externment         Proposal 12/12/2023                 ----
         Waluj   No.30/2022 U/s. 56(1)(B) of
                 M.P. Act.

4. The Police Inspector, MIDC Police Station Waluj found that the

activities of the petitioner are dangerous to the society. Several offences

were registered against the petitioner. Because of his terror in the

society, people are not coming forward to give statements against him

openly. He runs a business of illegal activities, such as illicit liquor, etc.

Police Inspector, therefore, prepared a report and sent a proposal for

taking action against the petitioner of externment.

5. A notice came to be issued to the the petitioner through Police

Inspector, Waluj MIDC Police Station. An inquiry was directed. The

petitioner appeared before the Inquiry Officer on 11 th May 2025. The

Inquiry Officer, thereafter, sent a report to the Deputy Commissioner of

Police.

Ethape (5) Cri.-WP-539-2025

6. The Deputy Commissioner of Police, on receipt of report from the

Police Inspector, issued a notice to the petitioner calling for say as to why

no action be taken against him for externment. Two instances were

quoted in the order on the basis of secret statements. The learned

Deputy Commissioner of Police came to the conclusion that it is

necessary to take action and passed an order dated 17 th October 2024,

thereby externing the petitioner from Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar City

and District for two years and further directed him not to enter in the

city and district limits without written permission. He was directed to

provide his residential address where he is staying in the State of

Maharashtra and directed not to leave State of Maharashtra as well.

7. The petitioner filed an Appeal before the learned Divisional

Commissioner. Vide order dated 27th December 2024, the learned

Divisional Commissioner rejected the appeal by confirming the order

dated 17th October 2024 passed by the learned Deputy Commissioner of

Police. Thus, the petitioner is before this Court.

Ethape (6) Cri.-WP-539-2025

8. Learned Advocate for the petitioner vehemently argued that there

is no subjective satisfaction of the authorities recorded in the orders. The

offences registered are not serious offences. C.R. No.850/2024 is only

under investigation. C.R. No.308/2024 is under the Maharashtra

Prohibition Act. C.R. No. 337/2023 is u/s. 307, 323, 504 and 506 of IPC

and Sections 3(1) and 3(1)(s) of SC and ST (Prevention of Atrocities)

Act, and it is pending before the Court. C.R. No.417/2019 is not a

serious offence, and the same is also pending. C.R. Nos.440/2021,

999/2021, 1062/2021, 237/2022, 340/2022, 606/2022 are only under

the Maharashtra Prohibition Act, and are also pending before the Court.

The petitioner has not been convicted for a single offense. The offenses

in crime No.605/2022 and 1539/2022 are only non-cognizable offences

and those could not have been considered. The petitioner has already

been acquitted in C.R. No.999/2021. The learned Advocate thus submits

only two offences are of 2024, and one is of 2023. All other offences are

stale offences and could not have been considered by the authorities for

taking action. He submits that no proper opportunity was given to the

petitioner, as copies of secret statements were not supplied. In any case, Ethape (7) Cri.-WP-539-2025

the action of externment from entire district is excessive. All the offences

were registered only in MIDC Waluj Police Station and still he was

externed from entire city and district. He thus prays for quashing and

setting aside the impugned action.

9. During the course of argument, the learned Advocate for the

petitioner relied upon the judgments in the cases of Sunil Yadavrao

Beedkar Vs. The Divisional Commissioner, Aurangabad and Or s.1, and

Ajij Babu Khan Pathan Vs. The State of Maharashtra and Ors.2

10. Learned APP vehemently opposed the petition. He submits that the

police had given notice to the petitioner before taking action. Even

inquiry was conducted by giving him a notice. There are statements of

secret witnesses showing that because of dangerous activities and terror

like situation created by the petitioner, people in the area are not coming

forward to give statements openly. The number of offences itself shows

that the petitioner is a person who is involved in illegal activities. Most

of the cases are under the Maharashtra Prohibition Act. He is the kind of

1 2020 ALL MR (Cri) 2902 2 2020 ALL MR (Cri) 2910 Ethape (8) Cri.-WP-539-2025

a person who does not allow the public servant to take action against

him. The orders are, therefore, rightly passed by the authorities. He thus

prays for dismissal of the writ petition.

11. In the present case, it is seen that there are total 12 offences

registered against the petitioner. Out of which, two are non-cognizable.

Seven cases are under the Maharashtra Prohibition Act. One case is only

under investigation, and in one he has been acquitted. There is no

conviction recorded as of today. Only two cases are from 2024. The

authorities have mainly given a reason of pending cases against the

petitioner. There is no any other material as of today.

12. In the case of Sunil Beedkar (supra), this Court held that when the

activities of the person are restricted to only one taluka, the action of

externing him from four talukas is excessive and arbitrary. The said

action was set aside. In the case of Ajij Babu Khan Pathan (supra), it is

held that the petitioner was externed from two districts on the ground

that 13 criminal cases pending against him. The Division Bench of this

Court concluded that while passing the order, the authority did not Ethape (9) Cri.-WP-539-2025

mention as to why the petitioner was being externed from two districts.

The Court held that the order suffers from non-application of mind and

set aside the action.

13. In the present case, looking to the order passed by the learned

Divisional Commissioner, it appears that he has not discussed as to how

he reached to the satisfaction that action needs to be taken. He has only

stated that there are total five offences against the body. From looking to

the order as it is, it is seen that there are only two bodily offences

pending against the petitioner. Sr. No. 11 and 12 are non-cognizable

cases. This observation appears to be against the record. So far as secret

statements are concerned, those are almost stereo-type statements and it

do not inspire the confidence of the Court. These statements are thus not

sufficient to take action against the petitioner.

14. For all these reasons, this Court is not convinced to take action

against the petitioner. Thus, the impugned action against the petitioner

is quashed and set aside. Hence, the following order:

 Ethape                                      ( 10 )                Cri.-WP-539-2025


                                      ORDER


         (i)     Criminal Writ Petition stands allowed in terms of prayer

         clause (B), which reads as under:

"Issue a Writ of Certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, quashing and setting aside the externment order dated 17.10.2024 passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Police, Circle-1, Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar and the appellate order dated 27.12.2024 passed by the Divisional Commissioner, Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar."

(ii) With this, writ petition stands disposed off.

[KISHORE C. SANT, J.]