Petitioners challenged externment orders under the Maharashtra Police Act. The court noted the orders expired on 26.8.2015 and declined to entertain the petitions.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
33-WPS-303 & 304-15.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.303 OF 2015
Ramdas @ Pintya Dattu Salunkhe ..Petitioner. Versus
The State of Maharashtra & Ors.
..Respondents.
WITH WRIT PETITION NO.304 OF 2015
Rahul Dattu Salunkhe
..Petitioner.
Versus
The State of Maharashtra & Ors.
..Respondents.
Mr. S.P.Joshi, advocate for petitioners in both petitions. Mrs. P.H.Kantharia, APP for the State in WP No.303/2015. Mrs. U.V.Kejriwal, APP for the State in WP No.304/2015.
Coram : RANJIT MORE & V. L. ACHLIYA, JJ. Date : 24th AUGUST, 2015 .
P. C. :
Heard.
2 By these petitions, petitioners are challenging
externment order dated 27.8.2014 passed by respondent no.2 under Section 55 of the Maharashtra Police Act as confirmed by the appellate authority under Section 60 of the Maharashtra Police Act.
1/3
Shivgan
33-WPS-303 & 304-15.doc
3 The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that subjective satisfaction as contemplated under Section 59 of the Maharashtra Police Act is not recorded in the notice of externment. We have gone through the notice issued under Section 59 of the Maharashtra Police Act. Petitioner in Writ Petition No.303 of 2015 is described as leader of the gang and the petitioner in Writ Petition No.304 of 2015 is described as a member of that gang in the notice issued under Section 59 of the Maharashtra Police Act. In the last paragraph of the notice, it is stated that petitioners have been engaged in criminal activities and due to petitioners' apprehension, nobody is coming forward to give complaint against them. Notice further apprehends that because of the activities of the petitioners, there is a danger to the life and properties of the citizens residing in that area. Order under Section 55 of the Maharashtra Police Act shows that number of cases are pending against the petitioners for serious offences under Chapter XVI and XVII of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.
4 Be that as it may, petitioners were externed for a period one year from Pune city and Pune district by the order dated 27.8.2014. That period is due to expire on 26.8.2015. In that view of
2/3
Shivgan
33-WPS-303 & 304-15.doc
the matter, we are not inclined to entertain these petitions. Petitions, accordingly, stand dismissed.
[V. L. ACHLIYA, J.] [RANJIT MORE, J.]
3/3
Shivgan
1 issue framed by the court
Whether writ petitions challenging externment orders should be entertained when the order is about to expire.
3 provisions across 1 enactments
Ramdas @ Pintya Dattu Salunkhe
Rahul Dattu Salunkhe
The State of Maharashtra
Ranjit More
V. L. Achliya
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
