SANTOSH S/O BAPURAO GUJJAR Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA DEPARTMENT OF HOME
LAWS(BOM)-2018-8-26
HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
Decided on August 07,2018

Santosh S/O Bapurao Gujjar Appellant
VERSUS
State Of Maharashtra Department Of Home Respondents

JUDGEMENT

S.S.Shinde, J. - (1.) Heard. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith, and heard finally with the consent of the parties.
(2.) This Petition is filed with the following prayer: C] By issuing appropriate Writ or order and directions, the Judgment and Order dated 22.11.2017 passed by Respondent No.2 i.e. Superintendent of Police Parbhani in Case Outward No.4330/LCB/2017, thereby externing present petitioners from Parbhani district for one year and the judgment and order passed by the Divisional Commissioner, Aurangabad on 03.03.2018 in Case No.2017/GA/CR-1/Pole-1/externment/CR/168 thereby dismissing the appeal of the present petitioners may kindly be quashed and set aside;
(3.) It is the case of the petitioners that on 29.11.2016 respondent no.3 had issued notice to the petitioners, thereby calling upon the petitioners for submitting their say regarding an externment proceedings proposed, and initiated against the petitioners, on the basis of proposal forwarded by respondent no.4 i.e. Police Inspector of Kotwali Police Station, Parbhani. In the said notice, reference has been made to sixteen different crimes, which were allegedly registered against the present petitioners. A common notice was given to all petitioners, more particularly, when all the petitioners were not accused in all crimes referred in the said notice. Even as per notice dated 29.11.2016, out of sixteen crimes, eleven crimes were resulted into acquittal, and remaining five were pending for investigation/trial. Upon perusal of the said notice, it can be seen that respondent no.3 had proposed an externment of petitioners from Parbhani, Nanded, Hingoli and Latur Districts for a period of two years, though all above mentioned crimes have been registered within Parbhani District. The notice further refers that, in near future there are elections of Municipal Corporation, and there was every possibility that the present petitioners may get involved themselves in illegal activities, and as such, to avoid the problem of law and order, an externment of present petitioners was proposed. Pursuant to the said notice, all the petitioners have submitted their reply separately and independently. Though the notice was common for all sixteen crimes though the accused persons were not accused in all crimes. The petitioners had submitted their reply individually and pointed out that, except Crime No.381/2016 registered with Kotwali Police Station, Parbhani, on any other case is pending against either of the petitioners. They have specifically denied that there is likelihood of any problem of law and order in the proposed Municipal elections. It was also pointed out that, the proposal for an externment was referring to crimes, which were registered in the year 2001 onwards. It was also pointed out that, for the similar cause, already an externment order was passed by respondent authorities in the year 2012-13. The said externment order was quashed and set aside by the High Court in Criminal Writ Petition No.664/2013, and on the basis of same crimes, fresh proceedings may not be initiated. Along with the aforesaid reply, the petitioners have submitted the copies of acquittal orders of four crimes in which the petitioners were acquitted by the Competent Court of law. These cases were referred as pending cases in the show cause notice dated 29.11.2016. At the time of issuance of notice and submitting reply of the petitioners, only one Crime i.e. Crime No.381/2016 registered with Kotwali Police Station was pending for investigation.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.