public. Considering the offences that were registered against the petitioner and the other members of the gang in quick succession, the externing authority was satisfied that the actions and the movements of the petitioner and the other members of the gang would cause danger and alarm to the public. In the circumstances of the case, we do not find that the order externing the petitioner from Akola district is harsh and excessive. Though the petitioner and the members of the gang have allegedly committed the offences in Akot town, the externing authority has found on a consideration of the serious offences registered against the petitioner and the others that they were liable to be externed from Akola district. The order appears to be just and proper and calls for no interference. The judgment reported in 2015 ALL MR (Cri) 2936 (Shri Rajwardhan Babaso Patil .vs. Shri Vijaysinha Jadhav and another) and relied on by the learned counsel for the petitioner cannot be applied to the facts of this case. In the instant case, the externment of the petitioner is under section 55 of the Act and not under Section 56 (1)(b) of the Act and therefore the externing authority, while passing the externment order has not relied on the in-camera statements of the witnesses for externing the petitioner and the other members of the gang.
