Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Aamna Bi Shiekh Pir Mohd Sheikh, challenged an externment order passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Police, Zone 3, Nagpur, under Section 56(1)(bb) of the Maharashtra Police Act, 1951. The notice issued under Section 59(1) of the Act proposed action under Section 56(1)(a) and (bb), but the final order relied only on clause (bb). The authority considered the petitioner's activity as prejudicial to the maintenance of public order as defined under the Maharashtra Prevention of Communal, Anti-Social and Other Dangerous Activities Act, 1980 (Anti-Social Act). The court examined whether the activity fell within Section 2(a)(iv) of the Anti-Social Act, which defines 'acting in any manner prejudicial to the maintenance of public order' as committing offences punishable with death, life imprisonment, or seven years or more, where the commission of such offences disturbs or is likely to disturb public order. The court noted that the definition uses the plural 'offences', indicating a requirement of continuous activity, not an isolated or singular act. The externment order was based on a single FIR, which did not satisfy the requirement of multiple offences. Consequently, the court held that the order was unsustainable and quashed it. The petition was allowed, and the rule was made absolute.
Headnote
A) Maharashtra Police Act - Externment - Section 56(1)(bb) - Requirement of Continuous Activity - The externment order under Section 56(1)(bb) of the Maharashtra Police Act, 1951, read with Section 2(a)(iv) of the Maharashtra Prevention of Communal, Anti-Social and Other Dangerous Activities Act, 1980, requires that the proposed externee must have committed more than one offence punishable with death, life imprisonment, or seven years or more, and such offences must disturb or be likely to disturb public order. An isolated or singular activity is insufficient. (Paras 2-3)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the activity of the petitioner, which was considered by the authority as prejudicial to the maintenance of public order under Section 56(1)(bb) of the Maharashtra Police Act, 1951, falls within the definition of 'acting in any manner prejudicial to the maintenance of public order' as defined under Section 2(a)(iv) of the Maharashtra Prevention of Communal, Anti-Social and Other Dangerous Activities Act, 1980.
Final Decision
The court allowed the petition, quashed the externment order, and made the rule absolute.
Law Points
- Externment order under Section 56(1)(bb) of Maharashtra Police Act
- 1951 requires continuous activity prejudicial to public order as defined in Section 2(a)(iv) of Maharashtra Prevention of Communal
- Anti-Social and Other Dangerous Activities Act
- 1980
- meaning more than one offence punishable with death
- life imprisonment
- or seven years or more
- and such offences must disturb or be likely to disturb public order
- isolated or singular activity is insufficient.
Case Details
2019 LawText (BOM) (02) 94
Criminal Writ Petition No.1221/2018
Mir Nagman Ali (for petitioner), S.S. Doifode (APP for respondents)
Aamna Bi Shiekh Pir Mohd Sheikh
State of Maharashtra, Through Deputy Commissioner of Police, Zone 3, Nagpur; Assistant Commissioner of Police, Kotwali Division, Nagpur
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Criminal writ petition challenging an externment order passed under Section 56(1)(bb) of the Maharashtra Police Act, 1951.
Remedy Sought
Quashing of the externment order passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Police, Zone 3, Nagpur.
Filing Reason
The externment order was based on a single FIR and did not satisfy the requirement of continuous activity as required under Section 2(a)(iv) of the Maharashtra Prevention of Communal, Anti-Social and Other Dangerous Activities Act, 1980.
Issues
Whether the externment order under Section 56(1)(bb) of the Maharashtra Police Act, 1951, based on a single FIR, is sustainable when the definition under Section 2(a)(iv) of the Anti-Social Act requires continuous activity involving multiple offences.
Submissions/Arguments
The petitioner argued that the externment order was based on a single FIR and did not meet the requirement of continuous activity as per Section 2(a)(iv) of the Anti-Social Act.
The respondents argued in support of the order, but the court found the order unsustainable.
Ratio Decidendi
For an externment order under Section 56(1)(bb) of the Maharashtra Police Act, 1951, read with Section 2(a)(iv) of the Maharashtra Prevention of Communal, Anti-Social and Other Dangerous Activities Act, 1980, the proposed externee must have committed more than one offence punishable with death, life imprisonment, or seven years or more, and such offences must disturb or be likely to disturb public order. An isolated or singular activity is insufficient.
Judgment Excerpts
We find that even though the notice issued under Section 59 (1) of the Maharashtra Police Act, 1951 was issued in respect of proposed action for externment to be taken against the petitioner under the provisions of Section 56(1) clauses (a) and (bb), the externment order has been passed by resorting to only the latter clause of this provision of law, that is under Section 56(1)(bb) of the Act of 1951.
A bare reading of clause (iv) reproduced above, would be sufficient for us to know what is contemplated under this definition. It is an activity which is continuous in nature and not something that is an isolated or a singular activity. This is obvious from the use of plural form of noun offence. The noun is employed as 'offences'. That would mean that there should be atleast more than one offence committed by the proposed externee for which the maximum punishment prescribed is of death or imprisonment for life or imprisonment for a term extending to 7 years or more.
Procedural History
The petitioner filed a criminal writ petition before the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Nagpur Bench, challenging an externment order passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Police, Zone 3, Nagpur. The court heard the matter and delivered judgment on 20.02.2019.
Acts & Sections
- Maharashtra Police Act, 1951: 56(1)(bb), 59(1)
- Maharashtra Prevention of Communal, Anti-Social and Other Dangerous Activities Act, 1980: 2(a)(iv)
