Partly allowed

Akshay @Lallo Naginbhai Chunara v. State of Gujarat

Gujarat HC11 Sept 2026SCR.A/1703/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court partly allowed an application by applicant Akshay Chunara seeking to quash an 18-month externment order. The court modified the order to the period already undergone as more than 16 months had elapsed, without adjudicating merits under Article 226.

What did the court decide?

The impugned order of externment is modified to the period already undergone instead of the original 18 months.

Akshay @Lallo Naginbhai Chunara Vs State of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Gujarat HC (2026)

¶1

R/SCR.A/1703/2026 (GJHC240043182026) ORDER DATED: 11/09/2026

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

¶3

R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION (AGAINST ORDER OF EXTERNMENT) NO. 1703 of 2026

¶4

========================================================== AKSHAY @LALLO NAGINBHAI CHUNARA

¶5

Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.

¶6

==========================================================

¶7

Appearance:

¶8

MR KISHAN K NAYI(13080) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 MS MAITHILI MEHTA, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1

¶9

==========================================================

¶10

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SANJEEV J.THAKER

¶11

Date : 11/09/2026

¶12

ORAL ORDER

¶13

This petition is filed by the petitioner praying for quashing and setting the order of Externment dated 07.05.2026 passed by respondent no.2 externing the petitioner from Anand, Kheda, Vadodara, Ahmedabad District for a period of 18 months, in purported exercise of the powers under the Gujarat Police Act, 1951.

¶14

Heard learned advocate for the petitioner and learned APP for the respondent-state.

¶15

Learned advocate for the petitioner has submitted that the impugned order of externment is based on registration of two FIRs being C.R.No.11215012240360 of 2024 and C.R.No.11215012240510 of 2024 registered with Khambhat City Police Station. Both the offences were registered under

¶16

Page 1 of 3

¶17

R/SCR.A/1703/2026 (GJHC240043182026) ORDER DATED: 11/09/2026

¶18

Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita and Gujarat Police Act.

¶19

He further submitted that the order of externment is of 18(eighteen) months, out of which, more than 16 months are already completed. He, therefore, prayed that considering the same, the order of externment of eighteen months be modified to the period already completed and the impugned order be set aside.

¶20

As against that, learned APP has submitted that looking to the peculiar facts of the case, appropriate order may be passed.

¶21

Having heard the learned advocates for the parties and having considering the material on record, more particularly, the fact that more than sixteen months have already been over from the date of passing of the impugned order of externment, this Court is of the opinion that this petition is required to be partly allowed, without entering into the merits of the case, by modifying the impugned order to a period already undergone instead of 18(eighteen) months, to which, the learned advocate for the petitioner does not have any objection.

¶22

Considering the facts of the present case and the

¶23

Page 2 of 3

¶24

R/SCR.A/1703/2026 (GJHC240043182026) ORDER DATED: 11/09/2026

¶25

consent given by the learned advocate for the applicant, this Court deems it fit to exercise the powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, without elaborately considering the merits of the case.

¶26

In view of the above, this petition is disposed of by modifying the impugned order to the period already undergone.

¶27

(SANJEEV J.THAKER,J)

¶28

SRILATHA

¶29

Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge.

¶30

Digitally signed by: SRILATHA VENKATARAO UPADHYAYULA(HC00185), PRINCIPAL PRIVATE SECRETARY, at High Court of Gujarat on 14/09/2026 11:19:57

¶31

Page 3 of 3

Akshay @Lallo Naginbhai Chunara v. State of Gujarat

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Akshay @Lallo Naginbhai Chunara v. State of Gujarat

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases