Case Note & Summary
The Bombay High Court decided three criminal writ petitions challenging externment orders passed under the Bombay Police Act, 1951. The petitioners were Ganpat @ Ganesh Tanaji Katare, Salim Mehboob Shaikh, and Jayshankar K. Raman. The common issue was that the show cause notices lacked material particulars such as date, month, time, and place of the alleged incidents, and in one case, the externment order relied on extraneous material not mentioned in the show cause notice. The court held that the failure to disclose material particulars in the show cause notice violates principles of natural justice, as the person externed cannot effectively respond. Additionally, reliance on extraneous material not in the show cause notice vitiates the order. The court quashed the externment orders and set aside the confirmations in appeal, allowing the petitions.
Headnote
A) Administrative Law - Externment - Show Cause Notice - Material Particulars - Bombay Police Act, 1951, Sections 56, 57 - The show cause notice must disclose material particulars including date, month, time and place of alleged incidents to enable the person to effectively respond; failure to do so violates principles of natural justice and vitiates the externment order (Paras 3-4).
B) Administrative Law - Externment - Extraneous Material - Bombay Police Act, 1951, Sections 56, 57 - An externment order cannot be based on material not mentioned in the show cause notice; reliance on extraneous material vitiates the order (Para 3).
C) Administrative Law - Externment - Territorial Jurisdiction - Bombay Police Act, 1951, Sections 56, 57 - Externment from multiple districts requires evidence of activities in each district; if the show cause notice only alleges activities in one district, externment from other districts is not justified (Para 3).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the externment orders under the Bombay Police Act, 1951 are vitiated due to reliance on extraneous material not mentioned in the show cause notice and due to lack of material particulars such as date, month and time of alleged incidents in the show cause notice.
Final Decision
The court allowed the petitions, quashed the externment orders and set aside the confirmations in appeal.
Law Points
- Externment order must be based on material disclosed in show cause notice
- Show cause notice must contain material particulars including date
- month
- time and place of alleged incidents
- Externment order cannot be based on extraneous material not mentioned in show cause notice
- Externment from multiple districts requires evidence of activities in each district
Case Details
2005 LawText (BOM) (09) 29
Criminal Writ Petition No.548 of 2005, Criminal Writ Petition No.1598 of 2005, Criminal Writ Petition No.1615 of 2005
Shri V.V. Purwant, Shri A.S. Gadkari, Shri U.N. Tripathi, Shri K.V. Saste, Ms S.D. Shinde
Ganpat @ Ganesh Tanaji Katare, Salim Mehboob Shaikh, Jayshankar K. Raman
Assistant Commissioner of Police and Ors., Shri M. Fernandes & Ors., Shri G. Aswati & Ors.
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Criminal writ petitions challenging orders of externment under the Bombay Police Act, 1951.
Remedy Sought
Quashing of externment orders and confirmation thereof in statutory appeals.
Filing Reason
The petitioners alleged that the show cause notices lacked material particulars and that the externment orders were based on extraneous material not mentioned in the notices.
Previous Decisions
Externment orders were passed by the authorities and confirmed in statutory appeals.
Issues
Whether the show cause notice must disclose material particulars such as date, month, time and place of alleged incidents.
Whether an externment order can be based on material not mentioned in the show cause notice.
Whether externment from multiple districts is justified when activities are confined to one district.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner in WP 548/2005 argued that the externment order referred to activities in Ramlal Chowk area not mentioned in the show cause notice, and that the order externed him from Solapur, Osmanabad and Pune while activities were confined to Solapur.
Petitioner in WP 1598/2005 argued that the show cause notice did not disclose date, month and time of alleged incidents.
Respondents argued in support of the externment orders.
Ratio Decidendi
The show cause notice must contain material particulars including date, month, time and place of alleged incidents to enable the person to effectively respond; failure to do so violates principles of natural justice. An externment order cannot be based on material not mentioned in the show cause notice.
Judgment Excerpts
In the impugned order of externment, there is a reference to the activities of the Petitioner in the Ramlal Chowk area. He submitted that this fact is not mentioned in the show cause notice and therefore, the impugned order is vitiated as reliance is placed on extraneous material.
He submitted that in the show cause notice, material details such as date, month and time of the alleged incidents relied upon are not disclosed and therefore, the order passed is in breach of principles of natural justice.
Procedural History
The petitioners were served with show cause notices under the Bombay Police Act, 1951 proposing externment. After hearing, externment orders were passed. The petitioners filed statutory appeals which were dismissed. Thereafter, they filed the present criminal writ petitions before the High Court.
Acts & Sections
- Bombay Police Act, 1951: 56, 57
