Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Nitesh s/o Jiwan Jangle, a permanent resident of Wadi, Nagpur, challenged an externment order dated 10 September 2012 passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Police, Zone 1, Nagpur under Section 56 of the Bombay Police Act, directing him to remove himself from Nagpur district for two years. The petitioner was involved in about eleven criminal cases, including under Section 394 IPC, with two acquittals and nine pending cases. The last offence was on 1 August 2011 under Sections 395 and 398 IPC and the Arms Act. A show cause notice was issued on 17 March 2012, and the externment order was passed on 10 September 2012. The petitioner argued three infirmities: inordinate delay from the last offence, vague allegations in the show cause notice, and lack of subjective satisfaction by the authority. The court, relying on the judgment in Shahid Mohammedali Bepari v. Sub-Divisional Magistrate (2012 ALL MR (Cri) 2246), held that while delay alone may not be fatal given multiple pending cases, the show cause notice contained only a list of criminal cases without specifying how the petitioner's movements caused harm or danger to the public. The authority also failed to record its subjective satisfaction that the petitioner's acts were calculated to cause harm, danger, or alarm. Consequently, the court quashed the externment order and allowed the petition.
Headnote
A) Bombay Police Act - Externment - Section 56 - Vague Allegations - The show cause notice must contain specific instances of the petitioner's activities causing harm or danger to the public, not merely a list of criminal cases - Held that vague allegations vitiate the externment order (Paras 6-7). B) Bombay Police Act - Externment - Section 56 - Subjective Satisfaction - The authority must record its subjective satisfaction that the petitioner's movements or acts are causing or are calculated to cause harm, danger, or alarm - Held that failure to record such satisfaction renders the order invalid (Paras 8-9). C) Bombay Police Act - Externment - Section 56 - Delay - Delay in passing externment order is not fatal if the petitioner is involved in multiple pending cases and statutory steps are taken in the interim - Held that delay alone does not vitiate the order (Para 5).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the externment order passed under Section 56 of the Bombay Police Act is sustainable when the show cause notice contains vague allegations and the authority fails to record subjective satisfaction
Final Decision
The court allowed the petition and quashed the externment order dated 10 September 2012 passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Police, Zone 1, Nagpur under Section 56 of the Bombay Police Act.
Law Points
- Externment order must be based on subjective satisfaction of the authority
- allegations must be specific and not vague
- delay in passing order may be justified if multiple cases are pending
