Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Suyog Gajanan Aundhkar, challenged an externment order passed by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Walwa Region, Islampur, under Section 56(1)(a) of the Maharashtra Police Act, 1951, and the subsequent appellate order of the Divisional Commissioner, Pune Division, which modified the externment. The petitioner was externed from Sangli district and restricted from entering Satara, Solapur, and Kolhapur cities for one year. The petitioner contended that the show-cause notice did not mention the in-camera statements of witnesses recorded by the police, thereby depriving him of an opportunity to effectively reply. The court examined the requirement of natural justice in externment proceedings and held that the failure to supply the substance of in-camera statements in the show-cause notice vitiates the proceedings. The court quashed both the externment order and the appellate order, allowing the writ petition.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Externment - Section 56(1)(a) Maharashtra Police Act, 1951 - Natural Justice - Show-cause notice must disclose the substance of in-camera statements of witnesses to enable the proposed externee to make an effective representation - Failure to do so renders the externment order illegal and liable to be quashed - Held that the right to be heard includes the right to know the material on which the action is proposed (Paras 6-7).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the failure to supply the substance of in-camera statements of witnesses in the show-cause notice vitiates the externment order passed under Section 56(1)(a) of the Maharashtra Police Act, 1951.
Final Decision
The court quashed the externment order dated 25/12/2020 passed by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Walwa Region, Islampur and the appellate order dated 19/04/2021 passed by the Divisional Commissioner, Pune Division. The writ petition was allowed.
Law Points
- Natural justice
- right to effective representation
- externment proceedings
- in-camera statements
- disclosure of material
- Section 56 Maharashtra Police Act
- 1951
- Section 110 CrPC
Case Details
2021 LawText (BOM) (07) 22
Criminal Writ Petition No.1835 of 2021
Mr.Ujjwal Agandsurve ib Mr.A.S. Gaikwad for the Petitioner, Mr.K.V. Saste, APP, for Respondent – State
Shri Suyog Gajanan Aundhkar
State of Maharashtra, The Divisional Commissioner, Pune Region, Sub-Division Officer, Walwa, Islampur Division, Sub-Divisional Police Officer, Islampur Division, Islampur, Sangli, Assistant Police Inspector, Kasegoan Police Station
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Criminal writ petition challenging externment order under Section 56(1)(a) of Maharashtra Police Act, 1951.
Remedy Sought
Quashing of externment order dated 25/12/2020 passed by Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Walwa Region, Islampur and appellate order dated 19/04/2021 passed by Divisional Commissioner, Pune Division.
Filing Reason
Petitioner aggrieved by externment order and appellate order; alleged violation of natural justice as show-cause notice did not mention in-camera statements of witnesses.
Previous Decisions
Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Walwa Region, Islampur passed externment order on 25/12/2020; Divisional Commissioner, Pune Division partly allowed appeal on 19/04/2021 modifying the order.
Issues
Whether the failure to supply the substance of in-camera statements of witnesses in the show-cause notice vitiates the externment order under Section 56(1)(a) of the Maharashtra Police Act, 1951.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner argued that show-cause notice did not mention in-camera statements of witnesses, depriving him of opportunity to effectively reply.
Respondent State argued that the proceedings were valid and the petitioner was given adequate opportunity.
Ratio Decidendi
In externment proceedings under Section 56(1)(a) of the Maharashtra Police Act, 1951, the show-cause notice must disclose the substance of in-camera statements of witnesses to enable the proposed externee to make an effective representation. Failure to do so violates principles of natural justice and renders the externment order illegal.
Judgment Excerpts
It is the case of the petitioner that on 15th March, 2019, the Sub-Inspector of Police, Islampur Police station, Islampur forwarded a proposal to the Police Inspector, Crime Branch, Sangli/ Special Executive Magistrate and requested to take action against the petitioner by invoking the provisions of section 110 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
Learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the show-cause notice does not mention about the in-camera statements of witnesses recorded by the police.
Procedural History
On 15/03/2019, police forwarded proposal under Section 110 CrPC. On 21/08/2019, proceedings under Section 56(1)(a) of Maharashtra Police Act initiated. Petitioner responded to notice dated 02/11/2019. On 25/12/2020, Sub-Divisional Magistrate passed externment order. Petitioner appealed to Divisional Commissioner, who partly allowed appeal on 19/04/2021. Petitioner filed writ petition on 23/07/2021. Judgment pronounced on 27/07/2021.
Acts & Sections
- Maharashtra Police Act, 1951: 56(1)(a)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: 110
