Karnataka High Court
Sri Zakriya Althaf vs The State Of Karnataka on 7 June, 2024
Author: S.R.Krishna Kumar
Bench: S.R.Krishna Kumar
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:19977
WP No. 14744 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF JUNE, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR
WRIT PETITION NO. 14744 OF 2024 (GM-POLICE)
BETWEEN:
SRI. ZAKRIYA ALTHAF,
S/O ALTHAF SAB,
AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS,
R/A SOCITY KERI,
SHIKARIPURA TOWN 577 427
SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. SRIKANTH PATIL K., ADVOCATE)
AND:
Digitally 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
signed by REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY,
Vandana S DEPARTMENT OF HOME,
Location: VIDHANA SOUDHA,
HIGH BENGALURU 560 001
COURT OF
KARNATAKA 2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER CUM
SUB-DIVISIONAL MAGISTRATE,
SAGARA SUB-DIVISION,
SAGARA 577 427.
3. THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE,
SHIKARIPURA SUB DIVISION,
SHIKARIPURA 577 427
4. THE POLICE SUB-INSPECTOR,
SHIKARIPURA TOWN POLICE STATION,
SHIKARIPURA TALUK 577 213
SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. S.T. NAIK, AGA)
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:19977
WP No. 14744 of 2024
THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH / SET ASIDE THE
IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 02/05/2024 IN NO. M.A.G./(GADIPARU)
VIVA 04/2024-25, PASSED BY THE R2 HEREIN VIDE ANNEXURE-A
AND ETC.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING,
THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
In this petition, the petitioner seeks quashing of the
impugned externment order at Annexure-A dated 02.05.2024,
passed by respondent No.2 under Section 55 of the Karnataka
Police Act, 1963 (for short "the K.P. Act").
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
AGA for the respondents and perused the material on record.
3. In addition to reiterating the various contentions urged
in the memorandum of petition and referring to the material on
record, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
impugned order passed by the 2nd respondent directing externment
of the petitioner is not only contrary to the provisions and procedure
prescribed / contained in Sections 55 to 58 of the K.P.Act, but also
against the principles governing externment as enunciated by the
Apex Court in the case of Deepak vs. State of Maharashtra -
NC: 2024:KHC:19977
2022 SCC OnLine SC 99 which has been followed by this Court in
the case of Giddappa Vs. Lambu Giddappa Vs. State of
Karnataka and others - W.P.No.8182/2023 dated 21.04.2023 and
in the case of Shakeeb @ Mohammed Shakeebullah vs. State of
Karnataka & others - W.P.No.14426/2023 dated 28.11.2023. It is
therefore submitted that the impugned order passed by the
respondents deserve to be quashed.
4. Per contra, learned AGA for the respondents would
support the impugned order and submits that there is no merit in
the petition and the same is liable to be dismissed.
5. As rightly contended by the learned counsel for the
petitioner, a perusal of the material on record including the
impugned order will clearly indicate that the 2nd respondent has
failed to follow the mandatory requirements and procedure
prescribed under Sections 55 to 58 of the Karnataka Police Act,
while passing the impugned order which is clearly contrary to the
principles enunciated by the Apex Court and this Court in the
judgments referred to supra. Under these circumstances, I am of
the view that the impugned order passed by the 2nd respondent at
Annexure-A dated 02.05.2024 deserves to be quashed.
NC: 2024:KHC:19977
6. In the result, I pass the following:
ORDER
(i) Petition is hereby allowed.
(ii) The impugned order dated 02.05.2024 at Annexure-A
passed by the 2nd respondent is hereby quashed.
Sd/-
JUDGE
GPG
