Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Ajij Babu Khan Pathan, challenged an externment order passed by the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Jalgaon, under Section 56(1)(a) and (b) of the Maharashtra Police Act, 1951, directing his externment from Jalgaon, Dhule, Nashik, and Buldhana districts for two years. The order was based on a proposal from the Police Inspector, Jalgaon City Police Station, which was approved by the Additional Superintendent of Police. An inquiry was conducted by the Sub Divisional Police Officer, and a show-cause notice was issued to the petitioner. After hearing the petitioner, the externment order was passed on 10.08.2017. The petitioner's appeal under Section 60 of the Act was dismissed by the Divisional Commissioner, Nashik Division, on 29.05.2018. The petitioner then filed a criminal writ petition in the Bombay High Court. The court examined the material relied upon by the authorities, which included 12 criminal cases registered against the petitioner between 2009 and 2016. The court noted that the petitioner was acquitted in 8 cases, and the remaining 4 cases were pending trial. The court observed that the externment order was based on stale incidents, with the most recent case being from 2016, and there was no material to show that the petitioner was a 'dangerous person' or 'habitual offender' causing alarm to the public. The court held that the subjective satisfaction of the authority was not supported by credible material, and the appellate order was cryptic and did not independently assess the grounds. Consequently, the court quashed the externment order and the appellate order, allowing the petition.
Headnote
A) Maharashtra Police Act - Externment - Section 56(1)(a) and (b) - Requirement of 'Dangerous Person' - The externment order under Section 56(1)(a) and (b) requires the authority to be satisfied that the person is a 'dangerous person' whose movements are causing alarm or danger to persons or property. Mere registration of crimes, especially when stale and not resulting in conviction, does not justify externment. The court held that the subjective satisfaction must be based on credible material indicating that the person is likely to commit offences again. (Paras 5-8) B) Maharashtra Police Act - Externment - Section 56(1)(b) - 'Habitual Offender' - The term 'habitual offender' under Section 56(1)(b) requires a consistent pattern of criminal activity. The court noted that the petitioner was acquitted in most cases and the remaining cases were pending, which does not establish habituality. The externment order was quashed as the material did not show that the petitioner was a habitual offender. (Paras 6-8) C) Maharashtra Police Act - Externment - Appellate Order - Section 60 - The appellate authority under Section 60 must independently assess the material and not merely endorse the externment order. The court found that the Divisional Commissioner's order was cryptic and did not address the petitioner's contentions, rendering it unsustainable. (Para 9)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the externment order passed under Section 56(1)(a) and (b) of the Maharashtra Police Act, 1951, and its confirmation in appeal, are sustainable when based on stale and insufficient material.
Final Decision
The petition is allowed. The externment order dated 10.08.2017 passed by the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Jalgaon, and the appellate order dated 29.05.2018 passed by the Divisional Commissioner, Nashik Division, are quashed and set aside. Rule is made absolute.
Law Points
- Externment order under Section 56(1)(a) and (b) of Maharashtra Police Act requires specific material showing person is dangerous and causing alarm
- mere registration of crimes is insufficient
- subjective satisfaction must be based on credible material
- appellate authority must consider grounds independently.
