Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, a resident of Kunigal Taluk, challenged an externment order dated 15-12-2022 passed by the Assistant Commissioner and Sub Divisional Magistrate, Tumkuru, under Section 55 of the Karnataka Police Act, 1963, externing him from Kunigal Taluk. The petitioner had three criminal cases pending: Crime No.108/2019 and Crime No.24/2020 both under Section 87 of the Act, and Crime No.195/2021 under Sections 341, 504, 323, 363, 34 IPC. The petitioner sought quashing of the externment order. The High Court heard arguments from both sides. The Court observed that the externment power under Section 55 is drastic and must be exercised as a last resort. The authority must consider whether less restrictive measures, such as proceedings under Section 107 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, would be sufficient to prevent the alleged harmful activities. In this case, the Assistant Commissioner did not record any satisfaction that such measures were inadequate. The Court held that the order was passed mechanically without proper application of mind and was disproportionate to the alleged conduct. Consequently, the Court quashed the externment order and allowed the writ petition.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Externment - Section 55 Karnataka Police Act, 1963 - Necessity of Considering Less Restrictive Measures - The Assistant Commissioner passed an externment order against the petitioner without considering whether proceedings under Section 107 of CrPC would suffice. The High Court held that externment is a drastic measure and must be a last resort; the authority must record satisfaction that less restrictive measures are inadequate. Since the order failed to do so, it was quashed. (Paras 5-10) B) Criminal Law - Externment - Section 55 Karnataka Police Act, 1963 - Proportionality - The externment order was based on three criminal cases, two under Section 87 of the Act and one under IPC. The Court held that the pendency of cases alone does not justify externment; the authority must assess the gravity and necessity. The order was disproportionate and set aside. (Paras 5-10)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the externment order passed by the Assistant Commissioner under Section 55 of the Karnataka Police Act, 1963 is valid when the authority did not consider whether proceedings under Section 107 of CrPC would be sufficient to prevent the petitioner's alleged harmful activities.
Final Decision
The High Court allowed the writ petition and quashed the externment order dated 15-12-2022 passed by the Assistant Commissioner cum Sub Divisional Magistrate, Tumkuru.
Law Points
- Externment order under Section 55 of Karnataka Police Act
- 1963 must be a last resort
- less restrictive measures like Section 107 CrPC must be considered
- subjective satisfaction must be based on material showing necessity of externment
- order must be proportionate and not arbitrary.
