Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Ganesh Balasaheb Changle, was served with a show-cause notice under Section 56(1)(b) of the Bombay Police Act, 1951 on 29th March 2013, proposing his externment from Nashik City, Nashik Commissionerate and Nashik Rural Districts for two years. The Externing Authority passed an externment order on 21st May 2013. The petitioner appealed, but the appeal was dismissed on 28th August 2013. He then filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India before the Bombay High Court. The core legal issue was whether the externment order under Section 56(1)(b) could be sustained when the material relied upon pertained to Section 56(1)(a), which deals with causing alarm, danger or harm to person and property, a requirement not present in Section 56(1)(b). The petitioner argued that the inclusion of such extraneous material vitiated the order. The appellate authority, in paragraph 6 of its order, dismissed this contention without proper reasoning, stating it did not consider the material extraneous. The High Court found the appellate authority's reasoning unsatisfactory and incomprehensible. The court held that the show-cause notice and externment order were under Section 56(1)(b), but the material in the order was entirely under Section 56(1)(a). This mismatch rendered the order invalid. The court quashed the externment order and the appellate order, allowing the petition.
Headnote
A) Bombay Police Act - Externment - Section 56(1)(b) - Mismatch of Section and Material - The externment order under Section 56(1)(b) was based on material relating to Section 56(1)(a), i.e., causing alarm, danger or harm to person and property, which is not required under Section 56(1)(b). The appellate authority failed to properly address this ground. Held that the order is vitiated and liable to be quashed (Paras 3-5).
Issue of Consideration
Whether an externment order under Section 56(1)(b) of the Bombay Police Act, 1951 is valid when the material considered pertains to Section 56(1)(a) of the same Act
Final Decision
The High Court quashed the externment order dated 21st May 2013 and the appellate order dated 28th August 2013, and allowed the writ petition.
Law Points
- Externment order under Section 56(1)(b) must be based on material satisfying requirements of that section
- not Section 56(1)(a)
- Appellate authority must give reasoned decision
- Use of extraneous material vitiates externment order
Case Details
2013 LawText (BOM) (10) 42
Writ Petition No.3371 of 2013
S.C. Dharmadhikari, G.S. Patel
Mr. U.N. Tripathi for the Petitioner, Mrs. M.H. Mhatre, APP for the State
The Dy. Commissioner of Police, Zone – , Nashik Town, Nashik; Secretary (Spl), Home Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai; The State of Maharashtra
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition challenging an externment order under the Bombay Police Act, 1951
Remedy Sought
Quashing of the externment order dated 21st May 2013 and the appellate order dated 28th August 2013
Filing Reason
The externment order under Section 56(1)(b) was based on material pertaining to Section 56(1)(a), and the appellate authority failed to properly consider this ground
Previous Decisions
Show-cause notice under Section 56(1)(b) on 29th March 2013; Externment order on 21st May 2013; Appeal dismissed on 28th August 2013
Issues
Whether the externment order under Section 56(1)(b) is valid when the material considered relates to Section 56(1)(a)
Whether the appellate authority's reasoning was satisfactory
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner argued that the externment order under Section 56(1)(b) was based on material under Section 56(1)(a), which is extraneous and vitiates the order
Respondent argued that the inclusion of such material was not extraneous and the order was valid
Ratio Decidendi
An externment order under Section 56(1)(b) of the Bombay Police Act, 1951 must be based on material that satisfies the requirements of that section. If the material pertains to a different section, such as Section 56(1)(a), the order is vitiated and cannot be sustained. The appellate authority must provide a reasoned decision addressing such grounds.
Judgment Excerpts
In our view, Mr. Tripathi is entirely justified in saying that although the Externment Order purports to be under Section 56(1)(b) of the Bombay Police Act, 1951, all the material in the Externment Order is under, and only under, Section 56(1)(a) of the Bombay Police Act, 1951.
We must confess that in our extremely limited understanding and appreciation of the law and, particularly, the Bombay Police Act, 1951, we are unable to understand what, if anything, this is supposed to mean.
Procedural History
On 29th March 2013, show-cause notice under Section 56(1)(b) of Bombay Police Act, 1951 was served. Externment order passed on 21st May 2013. Appeal filed and dismissed on 28th August 2013. Writ petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India.
Acts & Sections
- Bombay Police Act, 1951: Section 56(1)(a), Section 56(1)(b)
- Constitution of India: Article 226
