Case Note & Summary
The petitioners, Limbaji @ Vijay s/o Govind Ghobale and Hari @ Haridas (Haribhau) s/o Limbaji @ Ghobale, filed separate criminal writ petitions challenging externment orders passed against them by the District Superintendent of Police, Parbhani, acting as Sub Divisional Magistrate, under Section 56 of the Maharashtra Police Act, 1951. The orders externed them from four Tahsils of District Parbhani, one Tahsil of Beed District, and one Tahsil of Latur District for a period of 18 months. The petitioners also challenged the appellate orders passed by the Divisional Commissioner, Aurangabad, which confirmed the externment orders. The petitioners contended that the show cause notices issued to them were vague and did not specify the nature of the activity or the area from which they were to be externed. They also argued that the externment authority did not record subjective satisfaction that witnesses were unwilling to come forward to depose due to fear, as required under Section 56. The respondents, represented by the State of Maharashtra and police officials, defended the orders. The court, after hearing both sides, found that the show cause notices merely stated that the petitioners were involved in criminal activities without specifying the nature of such activities or the area of externment. The court also noted that the externment orders did not contain any finding regarding the unwillingness of witnesses. The appellate order was found to be cryptic and not a reasoned order. Consequently, the court quashed both the externment orders and the appellate orders, allowing the writ petitions. The court directed that the petitioners be released from any restraint imposed by the externment orders.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure - Externment - Section 56 Maharashtra Police Act, 1951 - Validity of Externment Order - The court examined whether the externment orders passed by the Sub Divisional Magistrate and confirmed by the Divisional Commissioner were valid. The court held that the orders were illegal as the show cause notices did not specify the nature of the activity and the area from which the petitioners were to be externed, and the authority failed to record subjective satisfaction that witnesses were unwilling to come forward due to fear. (Paras 1-10) B) Criminal Procedure - Show Cause Notice - Section 56 Maharashtra Police Act, 1951 - Requirement of Specificity - The court held that a show cause notice under Section 56 must specify the nature of the activity and the area from which the person is proposed to be externed. The notices in the present case were vague and did not comply with the requirements, rendering the subsequent orders invalid. (Paras 5-8) C) Criminal Procedure - Appellate Order - Section 60 Maharashtra Police Act, 1951 - Duty of Appellate Authority - The court held that the Divisional Commissioner, as appellate authority, must consider all grounds raised in the appeal and pass a reasoned order. The appellate order in the present case was cryptic and did not address the contentions raised, thus it was set aside. (Paras 9-10)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the externment orders passed under Section 56 of the Maharashtra Police Act, 1951 are valid when the show cause notices and orders lack specific details and the authority did not record subjective satisfaction regarding unwillingness of witnesses.
Final Decision
The court allowed both writ petitions, quashing the externment orders passed by the Sub Divisional Magistrate and the appellate orders passed by the Divisional Commissioner. The petitioners were directed to be released from any restraint imposed by the externment orders.
Law Points
- Externment order must be based on subjective satisfaction of the authority
- not on mere registration of crimes
- Show cause notice must specify the nature of the activity and the area to be externed from
- Appellate authority must consider all grounds raised in appeal
- Section 56 of Maharashtra Police Act requires that the authority be satisfied that witnesses are unwilling to come forward due to fear
- Failure to comply with mandatory provisions renders the order illegal.
