Disposed¶16

Ramu Verma v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC14 Sept 2023CRLP/14541/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Externment; stay of externment order during pendency of appeal; order kept in abeyance; U.P. Control of Goondas Act, 1970 Section 3(1); Article 226 certiorari and mandamus; Commissioner Bareilly Division Bareilly; Additional District Magistrate (Administration) Shahjahanpur; Appeal No. 1119 of 2023; Case No. 00874 of 2021; appeal to be decided preferably within 90 days; Ramu Verma v. State of U.P.; CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. 14541 of 2023; High Court of Judicature at Allahabad; order date 14.9.2023; disposed of.

What did the court decide?

Externment order dated 21.07.2023 held in abeyance during the pendency of the appeal before the Commissioner; Commissioner, Bareilly Division, Bareilly directed to decide the appeal preferably within 90 days of production of the certified copy of this order. ¶16

Ramu Verma Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others — Writ and Judicial Review | Allahabad HC (2023)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶16

Issue for consideration

Whether the externment order dated 21.07.2023 passed by the Additional District Magistrate, Shahjahanpur should be stayed / held in abeyance during the pendency of the appeal before the Commissioner. +1 more

¶10

Court's answer

The rejection of the petitioner's stay application by the Commissioner, Bareilly Division, Bareilly cannot be said to be lawful.

¶13

Ratio / Principle

The externment order dated 21.07.2023 passed by the Additional District Magistrate, (Administration) Shahjahanpur, under challenge in appeal, shall remain in abeyance during the pendency of the appeal.

¶14

Key takeaways

The Commissioner, Bareilly Division, Bareilly is directed to endeavour to decide the petitioner's appeal as expeditiously as possible, preferably within 90 days from the date of production of the certified copy of this order.ratio¶15

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Ramu Verma v. State of U.P. (Allahabad High Court, order dated 14.9.2023): Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 14541 of 2023 under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the order dated 23.08.2023 of the Commissioner, Bareilly Division, Bareilly in Appeal No. 1119 of 2023, to the extent it rejected the petitioner's stay application against an externment order dated 21.07.2023 passed under Section 3(1), U.P. Control of Goondas Act, 1970 by the Additional District Magistrate, (Administration) Shahjahanpur in Case No. 00874 of 2021. Finding the rejection of the stay application not lawful while the appeal remained pending, the Court directed that the externment order shall remain in abeyance during the pendency of the appeal, and that the Commissioner endeavour to decide the appeal as expeditiously as possible, preferably within 90 days from production of the certified copy of the order. Writ petition disposed of finally.

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:177977

¶2

Court No. - 80

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 14541 of 2023

¶4

Petitioner :- Ramu Verma Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Suresh Dhar Dwivedi Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Subhash Chandra Sharma,J.

¶6

None appeared on behalf of the petitioner except learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶7

The present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been moved with following prayers :-

¶8

I- To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 23.08.2023 passed by respondent No. 2 (Commissioner, Bareilly Division, Bareilly) in Appeal No. 1119 of 2023 to extent of rejection of the stay application of the petitioner.

¶9

II- To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the concerned respondents not to compel the petitioner to leave his District Shahjahanpur during the pendency of present writ petition.

¶10

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that an order for externment under Section 3(1) U.P. Control of Goondas Act, 1970 was passed by the Additional District Magistrate, Shahjahanpur in Case No. 00874 of 2021 vide order dated 21.07.2023 on the basis of report dated 12.04.2021 against which an appeal was filed before the Commissioner, Bareilly Mandal, Bareilly which was admitted and is still pending but no stay order of externment was passed. In this way, during the pendency of appeal, if the affect of order in question is not stayed the purpose of appeal would be defeated, therefore, requested to direct the court concerned not to take any coercive action against the petitioner in pursuance of externment order dated 21.07.2023 during the pendency of appeal and to decide the appeal as expeditiously as possible.

¶11

Learned A.G.A. urged that in this case order was passed by the Additional District Magistrate, (Administration) Shahjahanpur on the basis of material on record and against which appeal was filed but he has nothing to object about the stay of operation of order for externment during the pendency of appeal.

¶12

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned A.G.A. for the State, perusal of record

¶13

and the order passed by the Commissioner at the time of admission of appeal, it appears that though the appeal has been filed and is still pending before the court of Commissioner for final hearing but the application filed by the petitioner for staying the implementation of the order in question was rejected which cannot be said to be lawful.

¶14

As a result, it is directed that the order dated 21.07.2023 passed by the Additional District Magistrate, (Administration) Shahjahanpur for externment and under challenge in appeal shall remain in abeyance during the pendency of appeal.

¶15

It is also directed that Commissioner, Bareilly Division, Bareilly shall made his endeavour to decide the appeal of the petitioner as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of 90 days from the date of production of certified copy of this order.

¶16

Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of finally.

¶17

Order Date :- 14.9.2023 Suraj Srivastav

¶18

Digitally signed by :- SURAJ SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Ramu Verma v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramu Verma v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Belal Vs State of U.P. and Another

Shueb @ Pintoo Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Saheb Alam @ Mitthi Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Ravindra Sharma @ Pintu Pandit Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Ram Kishore Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Mukesh Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others