This judgment dismisses a writ petition challenging the validity of an externment order imposed on the petitioner for two years. The court held that the Externing Authority acted properly and took sufficient application of mind while considering the allegations against the petitioner.
The writ petition was dismissed.
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.
WP-228-18.odt
1 / 8
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.228 OF 2018
Sohail Kasam Shaikh .... Petitioner
versus
The State of Maharashtra & Ors.
... Respondents
CORAM : R. M. SAVANT & SARANG V. KOTWAL, JJ. DATED : 19th APRIL, 2017
P.C. :
Nesarikar
2 / 8 WP-228-18.odt
(1) C.R.No.139/15 U/s 141, 142, 143, 504, 506 of the Indian Penal Code; (2) C.R.No.411/15 U/s 323, 324, 504(2) of the Indian Penal Code; (3) C.R.No.317/16 U/s 141, 143, 144, 145, 148, 149, 307, 353, 504, 506 of the Indian Penal Code r/w 37(1)(a) of Maharashtra Police Act r/w 4 and 27 of Indian Arms Act.
notice mentioned the proceedings u/s 107 of Criminal Procedure Code, conducted against him. The show cause notice
3 / 8 WP-228-18.odt
also includes statements of two witnesses which were recorded in-camera.
the enquiry report, the Petitioner's submissions and after enquiring himself into the matter, the Deputy Commissioner of
4 / 8 WP-228-18.odt
Police, Zone V, Mumbai, reached a conclusion that the Petitioner was committing serious offences under the IPC, endangering lives of the residents in locality. His acts were causing alarm in the minds of the people and they were not coming forward to depose against him. Based on these circumstances, Deputy Commissioner of Police, Zone V, Mumbai, passed the impugned externment order directing the Petitioner to remove himself from the limits of Brihan Mumbai for a period of two years.
5 / 8 WP-228-18.odt
submitted that both the impugned orders are not properly passed and are liable to be set aside. He submitted that the Petitioner was a victim of fights between two groups. He submitted that the Petitioner has not committed any offence, but himself had suffered injuries for which the police did not register his complaint, but implicated him falsely in the offence punishable u/s 307 of IPC. He further submitted that all these offences are stale and have no bearing on the issuance of show cause notice. He submitted that considering the gap between the registration of the offences and the issuance of show cause notice, it is clear that the extreme step of externing the Petitioner from the locality, was not necessary. He submitted that the witnesses whose statements were recorded in-camera, were not truthful witnesses and there was no check on the veracity of their statements. He further submitted that the Appellate Authority did not consider his submissions in their proper perspective. He further submitted that both the orders should be set aside.
6 / 8 WP-228-18.odt
7 / 8 WP-228-18.odt
8 / 8 WP-228-18.odt
conclusion that the Petitioner was engaged in the commission of offences involving force or violence amounting the offence punishable under Chapter 16 and 17 of the IPC. The statements recorded in-camera sufficiently demonstrate that the witnesses were not willing to come forward and even in other cases the Externing Authority has recorded his satisfaction that due to the alarm caused by the Externee, the residents were not willing to come forward to depose against him.
(SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.) (R. M. SAVANT, J.)
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the externment order passed against the petitioner was properly passed by the Externing Authority.
Whether the offences recorded against the petitioner justify the issuance of an externment order under Section 56 of the Maharashtra Police Act.
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Sohail Kasam Shaikh
The State of Maharashtra
R. M. Savant
Sarang V. Kotwal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
