Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, a resident of Bailhongal, challenged an externment order dated 28.07.2023 passed by the Assistant Commissioner cum-Sub-Divisional Magistrate, externing him from Bailhongal Sub-Division to Bagalkot for three months under Sections 55 and 56 of the Karnataka Police Act, 1963. The petitioner had been involved in three crimes, all registered under Section 78(3) of the Act, a non-cognizable offence. The first crime was registered in 2015, the second in 2021, and the third in 2022. All three cases were closed by the respective courts upon imposition of fines. Despite the closure of these cases, a report was generated against the petitioner leading to a show cause notice for externment. The petitioner appeared before the authority and offered his explanation, but the externment order was still passed. The petitioner argued that his fundamental right to movement was being curtailed arbitrarily, as the cases were non-cognizable, closed, and did not satisfy the statutory requirement for externment under Section 56(g) of the Act, which mandates thrice convictions under Sections 78, 79 or 80 within a period of three years. The respondents contended that the petitioner had become dangerous to society and that due procedure was followed. The Court examined the statutory framework under Sections 55 to 60 of the Karnataka Police Act, 1963, and observed that Section 56(g) specifically requires three convictions within three years for offences under Sections 78, 79 and 80. In the present case, the offences were spread over a period of eight years and did not fall within the mandated three-year window. Moreover, all cases had been closed by fines and involved non-cognizable offences, indicating no ongoing threat. The Court held that the externment order was illegal and passed in gross misuse of power. Accordingly, the writ petition was allowed and the externment order was quashed.
Headnote
A) Externment - Conditions for Externment under Section 56(g) - Section 56(g), Karnataka Police Act, 1963 - Externment under Section 56(g) requires a person to have been convicted thrice of an offence under Sections 78, 79 or 80 of the Act within a period of three years - The petitioner's three cases were registered in 2015, 2021 and 2022, not within a single three-year period, thus the condition was not satisfied - Held that the externment order was illegal as it did not meet the statutory requirement (Paras 8-9). B) Externment - Stale and Closed Non-Cognizable Offences - Articles 226 and 227, Constitution of India; Sections 55 and 56, Karnataka Police Act, 1963 - Externment curtails fundamental right to movement and cannot be based on stale and closed cases, especially those involving non-cognizable offences - All three cases against the petitioner were closed by imposition of fines, and two of them dated back to 2015 and 2021, indicating no current threat - Held that the order was passed in gross misuse of power and was quashed (Paras 4-5, 9).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the externment order passed under Sections 55 and 56 of the Karnataka Police Act, 1963, based on three closed non-cognizable offences, is valid?
Final Decision
The writ petition was allowed. The externment order dated 28.07.2023 passed by the 2nd respondent was quashed.
Law Points
- Externment under Sections 55 and 56 of Karnataka Police Act
- 1963
- section 56(g) requires thrice conviction under sections 78
- 79 or 80 within three years
- externment order based on closed non-cognizable offences is illegal
- right to movement cannot be curtailed arbitrarily
