Decided on March 09,2021

Irshad Hussian Qurashi Appellant
STATE OF M P Respondents


Shailendra Shukla,J. - (1.) Submissions were made on I.A.No.1766/2021, which is an application for amendment in prayer clause. As per the application, the date of the impugned order was wrongly mentioned as 27.8.2018 whereas, it was 4.2.2021. The application for amendment stands allowed in view of the fact that the date mentioned earlier in prayer clause was written erroneously. Let the amendment be carried out during the course of the day. Accordingly, I.A.No.1766/2021 stands allowed and disposed of. Final submissions were heard. The same is being disposed of as under :- 1. The present Writ Appeal under Section 2(1) of Madhya Pradesh Uchcha Nyayalaya (Khand Nyayapeeth Ko Appeal) Adhiniyam, 2005, has been preferred against order dated 4.2.2021, passed in W.P.No.20518/2020, refusing to set aside the order dated 17.9.2020, passed by the District Collector, District Shajapur and order dated 14.12.2020, passed by the Commissioner, Division Ujjain, regarding externment of the petitioner for a period of six months from 17.9.2020.
(2.) The facts of the case precisely speaking are that, the Superintendent of Police, Ujjain requested the District Magistrate to initiate externment proceedings against the petitioner for being involved in criminal activities and the grounds of externment were served on 29.11.2017, as the petitioner was obstructing Government employees to execute Government work and thereby creating panic and terror resultant to which no witness was coming forward to depose against him. Hence, it was requested that the petitioner be externed under Section 5(a)(b) of Madhya Pradesh Rajya Suraksha Adhiniyam, 1990 (herein after referred as 'the Act of 1990'). The District Magistrate, Ujjain, issued show cause notice against the petitioner under Section 8 of the Act of 1990. The petitioner submitted his reply along with affidavits in support refuting allegations of being involved in criminal activities and submitting that he was involved in the social service during lock down period. However, the submission of the petitioner did not find support from District Magistrate and externment order was passed for a period of six months vide order dated 17.9.2020. The appeal against this order also stood dismissed on 14.12.2020.
(3.) In the impugned order passed in writ petition which was preferred by the petitioner, it was observed that in view of the fact that petitioner is consistently involved himself in the criminal activities, his acquittal in some of the cases would not be enough to set aside the orders of externment and petition was dismissed.;

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