Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Asgar @ Azhar Khan @ Bablu Don Safdar Khan, filed a Criminal Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India before the Bombay High Court, Nagpur Bench, challenging two orders: (1) an externment order dated 07.04.2025 passed by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Malkapur, Buldhana, externing him from Malkapur, Nandura and Motala Talukas for six months under Section 56(1)(a)(b) of the Maharashtra Police Act; and (2) an appellate order dated 16.07.2025 passed by the Divisional Commissioner, Amravati Division, dismissing his appeal under Section 60 of the Act and confirming the externment. The petitioner had received a show cause notice on 08.04.2024 from the Sub-Divisional Police Officer, and another on 17.05.2024 from the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, both calling upon him to show cause why he should not be externed from Buldhana District for two years under Section 56(1)(a)(b). The notices listed five crimes allegedly committed by the petitioner. The petitioner appeared, filed a reply denying the allegations, and specifically stated that he had been acquitted in all five crimes. He also supplied copies of the acquittal judgments for crimes at serial nos. 3 to 5. Despite this, the Sub-Divisional Magistrate passed the externment order for six months, and the appeal was dismissed. The petitioner argued that the authorities failed to consider the acquittals, which was a vital factor. The court, after hearing both sides, found that the externment order was passed mechanically without considering the acquittal judgments. The court held that the order was unsustainable and quashed both the externment order and the appellate order, allowing the petition.
Headnote
A) Maharashtra Police Act - Externment - Section 56(1)(a)(b) - Consideration of Acquittals - The petitioner challenged externment order and appellate order under Article 226 of Constitution of India - The show cause notice mentioned five crimes, but the petitioner was acquitted in all five - The authorities failed to consider the acquittal judgments and mechanically passed the externment order - Held that the externment order is unsustainable as the authority did not apply its mind to the material fact of acquittals (Paras 3-6). B) Constitutional Law - Article 226 - Judicial Review of Externment Orders - The High Court can interfere when the order is based on non-application of mind or ignores relevant material - The court set aside the externment order and the appellate order - Held that the orders are quashed and set aside (Paras 6-7).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the externment order passed under Section 56(1)(a)(b) of the Maharashtra Police Act is sustainable when the petitioner has been acquitted in the offences mentioned in the show cause notice and the authorities failed to consider the acquittals.
Final Decision
The petition is allowed. The externment order dated 07.04.2025 passed by respondent No.1 and the appellate order dated 16.07.2025 passed by the Divisional Commissioner are quashed and set aside.
Law Points
- Externment order must be based on subjective satisfaction of the authority
- consideration of acquittals is mandatory
- failure to consider relevant material vitiates the order
- Section 56(1)(a)(b) Maharashtra Police Act requires live link between past conduct and future threat.
