Allowed¶27

Lakhan Sahebrao Ambhore v. State of Maharashtra through Sub Divisional Magistrate Akot

Bombay HC15 Dec 2025WP/922/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bombay High Court, Nagpur Bench; Criminal Writ Petition No. 922 of 2025; decided 15.12.2025 by M.M. Nerlikar, J.; petitioner Lakhan Sahebrao Ambhore v. State of Maharashtra; externment order u/s 56(1)(a) Maharashtra Police Act 1951 quashed for non-application of mind; no live nexus between last offence (Crime No.209/2023, S. 160 IPC) registered in 2023 and externment order dated 04/03/2025; stale offences; appellate confirmation by Divisional Commissioner, Amravati dated 07/11/2025 also quashed; petition allowed.

What did the court decide?

The Criminal Writ Petition was allowed and both the order dated 04/03/2025 passed by respondent No.1-Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Akola, and the order dated 07/11/2025 passed by respondent No.3-Divisional Commissioner, Amravati, were quashed and set aside. ¶27

Lakhan Sahebrao Ambhore Vs State of Maharashtra through Sub Divisional Magistrate Akot — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

2025:BHC-NAG:14247

¶2

¶3

26-Cr.WP-922-2025

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR .

¶5

CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 922 OF 2025

¶6

Lakhan Sahebrao Ambhore

¶7

-- VERSUS --

¶8

State of Maharashtra and Others

¶9

Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram,__________________________________________________________________________ appearances, Court's orders of directions Court's or Judge's orders. and Registrar's Orders.

¶10

Mr. M.N. Ali, Advocate for the Petitioner.

¶11

Mr. A.M. Joshi, A.P.P. for the Respondents/State.

¶12

CORAM : M.M. NERLIKAR, J.

¶13

DATE : DECEMBER 15, 2025.

¶14

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.P.P.

¶15

The present proceeding arises out of the order dated 04/03/2025 passed by respondent No.1Sub Divisional Magistrate, Akola, under Section 56(1)(a) of the Maharashtra Police Act, 1951. The appeal preferred by the petitioner was dismissed on 07/11/2025, thereby confirming the order passed by respondent No.1.

¶16

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the offences which are registered way back in the years 2016, 2021 and 2023 were considered for externing the petitioner, which, according to him, are stale offences. There is

¶17

¶18

26-Cr.WP-922-2025

¶19

no live nexus between the last offence and the order of externment. As this limited challenge is raised, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that, under such circumstances, the impugned order is nothing but non-application of mind.

¶20

On the other hand, the learned A.P.P. submits that though the offences were registered long back, however, the offences are very serious in nature. He further submits that the petitioner has committed last offence of affray in the year 2023, and therefore there is no merit in the petition and the same deserves to be rejected.

¶21

After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.P.P., apparently, it appears that three crimes are registered against the petitioner, which are registered in the years 2016, 2021 and 2023. The last offence was registered under Section 160 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, i.e., Crime No.209/2023. The order of externment was passed on 04/03/2025. The respondent No.1 has lost sight of the fact that the order of externment was passed after two years after the commission of last offence. There is absolutely no live link between the last committed offence and the order of externment. The said aspect was also not considered by the respondent No.3. Therefore, both the Authorities have failed to apply their minds, and

¶22

¶23

26-Cr.WP-922-2025

¶24

therefore, the impugned orders cannot sustain in law. Hence, the following order:-

¶25

O R D E R

¶26

(i) The Criminal Writ Petition is allowed;

¶27

(ii) The order dated 04/03/2025 passed by respondent No.1-Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Akola, and the order dated 07/11/2025 passed by respondent No.3-Divisional Commissioner, Amravati, are hereby quashed and set aside.

¶28

[ M.M. NERLIKAR, J ]

¶29

Piyush Mahajan

Lakhan Sahebrao Ambhore v. State of Maharashtra through Sub Divisional Magistrate Akot

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Lakhan Sahebrao Ambhore v. State of Maharashtra through Sub Divisional Magistrate Akot

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

Sawan S/O Baldeoraj Sahani Vs Smt. Anita Raju Wargis

Sunanda W/O Narendra Bhala through Power of Attorney Narendra S/O Radhakisan Bhala Vs Mohanlal S/O Chaganlal Rathi Prop. of Rathi Agencies

Pallavi W/O Prashant Wakdikar and Anr. vs Prashant S/O Ramesh Wakdikar

Purushottam Sahebrao Deshmukh vs State of Maharashtra Thr Pso Ps Risod Tah Resod Dist Washim

M.S. Electricity Distribution Company Ltd. Thr. Superintending Engineer, M.S.E.B., Vs M/S. Jai Bamleshwari Rice Mill Thr. Prop. Dipak R. Jaiswal and One

Pawan S/O Subhash Gosewade Vs State of Mah. Thr. P.S.O., P.S. Wadi and 5 Others