Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Nilesh Bhende, challenged an externment order passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Police, Amravati, under Section 56(1)(a) and (b) of the Maharashtra Police Act, 1951, directing him to remove himself from Amravati District for two years. The order was confirmed by the Divisional Commissioner. The petitioner argued that the externment was based on 19 crimes, but in many of those cases he had been acquitted, and the remaining were pending trial. He contended that the authority did not apply its mind to the outcome of the cases and that the material did not show him to be a habitual offender or a danger to society. The court examined the list of crimes and noted that out of 19, several resulted in acquittal, some were pending, and the sections invoked were mostly minor (e.g., Sections 188, 341 IPC). The court held that the subjective satisfaction of the authority must be based on credible material indicating a consistent pattern of criminal activity. Since the authority failed to consider the acquittals and the trivial nature of pending cases, the externment order could not be sustained. The court quashed the impugned orders and allowed the petition.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Externment - Section 56(1)(a) and (b) of Maharashtra Police Act, 1951 - Habitual Offender - The court examined whether the externment order was valid when the authority relied on 19 crimes, but many resulted in acquittal or were pending. Held that the authority must consider the outcome of cases; mere registration of cases without convictions does not justify externment. The order was quashed as the material did not establish the petitioner as a habitual offender or danger to society (Paras 2-10).
B) Criminal Law - Externment - Subjective Satisfaction - Section 56 of Maharashtra Police Act, 1951 - The court held that the subjective satisfaction of the externment authority must be based on credible material showing a consistent pattern of criminal activity. In this case, the authority failed to consider that the petitioner was acquitted in several cases and that the pending cases were of trivial nature. The externment order was set aside (Paras 5-10).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the externment order passed under Section 56(1)(a) and (b) of the Maharashtra Police Act, 1951 against the petitioner is sustainable in law when most of the crimes relied upon resulted in acquittal or are pending, and the petitioner is not shown to be a habitual offender.
Final Decision
The petition is allowed. The impugned order dated 09-05-2022 passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Police, Amravati Division No.2, and the order dated 13-07-2022 passed by the Divisional Commissioner, Amravati Division, are quashed and set aside. Rule is made absolute in those terms.
Law Points
- Externment order under Section 56 of Maharashtra Police Act
- 1951 requires subjective satisfaction based on material showing the person is a habitual offender or dangerous
- mere registration of cases without convictions or pattern is insufficient
- acquittals and pending cases must be considered
- externment cannot be based on stale or trivial incidents.
Case Details
2023 LawText (BOM) (01) 317
Criminal Writ Petition No. 678 of 2022
Mr. T.U. Tathod for the Petitioner; Mr. S.A. Ashirgade, APP for the Respondents/State
Nilesh S/o. Purushottam Bhende
The Divisional Commissioner, Amravati Division, Amravati; The Deputy Police Commissioner, Amravati Division No.2, District Amravati; Police Station Officer, Police Station Rajapeth, Amravati
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Criminal writ petition challenging externment order under Section 56 of Maharashtra Police Act, 1951.
Remedy Sought
Quashing of externment order dated 09-05-2022 passed by Deputy Commissioner of Police and confirmation order dated 13-07-2022 passed by Divisional Commissioner.
Filing Reason
Petitioner was ordered to remove himself from Amravati District for two years based on 19 crimes, many of which resulted in acquittal or were pending, without proper application of mind.
Previous Decisions
Deputy Commissioner of Police passed externment order on 09-05-2022; Divisional Commissioner confirmed it on 13-07-2022.
Issues
Whether the externment order under Section 56(1)(a) and (b) of the Maharashtra Police Act, 1951 is valid when the authority relied on crimes where the petitioner was acquitted or cases are pending.
Whether the subjective satisfaction of the authority was based on credible material showing the petitioner as a habitual offender or danger to society.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner argued that out of 19 crimes, many resulted in acquittal and the remaining are pending; the authority did not consider the outcome and the material does not show him as a habitual offender.
Respondent/State argued that the externment order was passed after due consideration of the material and subjective satisfaction.
Ratio Decidendi
For an externment order under Section 56 of the Maharashtra Police Act, 1951, the authority must base its subjective satisfaction on credible material showing a consistent pattern of criminal activity indicating that the person is a habitual offender or a danger to society. Mere registration of cases without considering acquittals or the trivial nature of pending cases is insufficient. The authority must apply its mind to the outcome of the cases relied upon.
Judgment Excerpts
The respondent No.2 to arrive at subjective satisfaction before passing the order, placed reliance on 19 crimes registered against the petitioner and others at various police stations within the limit of the Amravati City.
In this case, the authority has not considered the outcome of the cases. The material placed before the authority does not show that the petitioner is a habitual offender or a danger to the society.
Procedural History
The Deputy Commissioner of Police, Amravati Division No.2, passed an externment order on 09-05-2022 under Section 56(1)(a) and (b) of the Maharashtra Police Act, 1951, directing the petitioner to remove himself from Amravati District for two years. The petitioner appealed to the Divisional Commissioner, who confirmed the order on 13-07-2022. The petitioner then filed a criminal writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India before the Bombay High Court, Nagpur Bench, which was heard and decided on 09-02-2023.
Acts & Sections
- Maharashtra Police Act, 1951: Section 56(1)(a), Section 56(1)(b)
- Indian Penal Code, 1860: 341, 188, 268, 269
- Disaster Management Act, 2005: 51(b)
- Epidemic Diseases Act, 1897: 2, 3, 4
- Constitution of India: Articles 226, 227
