Case Note & Summary
The case involves three criminal writ petitions filed before the Bombay High Court challenging the legality of an externment order dated 3.2.2017 passed under Section 55 of the Maharashtra Police Act, 1951, and the appellate order dated 12.4.2017 passed by the Divisional Commissioner, Pune, under Section 60 of the Act, which confirmed the externment of the petitioners. The externment proceedings were initiated by the Deputy Commissioner of Police, Pimpri Division, Pune, based on a proposal from PI Wakad. Notices under Section 59 of the Act were issued in December 2016 to the gang leader Rakesh Popat Bharne and fourteen gang members, including the petitioners, alleging collective criminal activity. One gang member, Ravindra Dhumal, could not be served. After affording an opportunity of hearing, the Assistant Commissioner of Police submitted a report on 9.1.2017, and the Deputy Commissioner thereafter issued a notice dated 12.1.2017 for further hearing. The competent authority passed the externment order on 3.2.2017 externing the gang leader and thirteen members from Pune district for one and a half years, while dropping two members, Jaydeep Mane and Vinayak Gaikwad, on the ground that they were to contest municipal elections, with the exclusion being conditional. The externing authority considered offences registered under Chapters XII and XVI of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, and in-camera statements of four witnesses. Appeals under Section 60 of the Act were partly allowed by the Divisional Commissioner, who confirmed the externment but reduced the period to one year. In the writ petitions, the petitioners contended that the externment proceedings were vitiated because two gang members were excluded from the order, arguing that Section 55 requires action against all members of a gang and that the authority had no power to discriminate. They further submitted that the four crimes relied upon—Crime Nos. 65/2000, 224/2007, 170/2007 and 3164/2007—had resulted in acquittals and thus could not form the basis for externment. Additionally, they argued that individual offences registered against each petitioner could not be considered in a gang externment proceeding under Section 55. The Bombay High Court considered these submissions. The court's final decision and ratio are not provided in the available text.
Issue of Consideration
Whether exclusion of two gang members from externment proceedings under Section 55 of the Maharashtra Police Act renders the entire proceedings invalid; Whether acquittal in prior criminal cases prohibits their consideration as material for externment; Whether individual offences can be taken into account when proceeding under Section 55 of the Maharashtra Police Act
Case Details
2017 LawText (BOM) (09) 104
Criminal Writ Petition Nos. 1811 of 2017, 1812 of 2017, and 1836 of 2017
R.M. Savant, Sandeep K. Shinde
C.K. Pendse, V.L. Kolekar, A. Siddiqui, Sana Hanif Shaikh, P. Vidya, M.M. Deshmukh
Vijay Kailas Bhosale, Dinesh Mohanlal Yadav, Chetan Jaysing Nikalje, Sanjay Madhukar Kumkar, Rakesh Popat Bharne, Anil Tukaram Mohite
The State of Maharashtra (Through D.C.P. Zone-3, Pune City, Pune), Divisional Commissioner, Pune Council Hall, Camp, Pune 411001, The Secretary, Mantralaya, Bombay, Deputy Commissioner of Police, In charge of Vakad, Pune
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Criminal writ petitions challenging externment orders passed under the Maharashtra Police Act, 1951.
Remedy Sought
Quashing of the externment order dated 3.2.2017 and the appellate order dated 12.4.2017 confirming externment.
Filing Reason
Petitioners contended that the externment proceedings were vitiated because two gang members were excluded, that they were acquitted in the previous criminal cases relied upon, and that individual offences should not have been considered under Section 55 of the Act.
Previous Decisions
Externment order passed by Deputy Commissioner of Police dated 3.2.2017 externing petitioners for one and a half years; appeal partly allowed by Divisional Commissioner dated 12.4.2017 reducing period to one year but confirming externment.
Issues
Whether exclusion of two gang members from externment proceedings under Section 55 of the Maharashtra Police Act renders the entire proceedings invalid?
Whether acquittal in prior criminal cases prohibits their consideration as material for externment?
Whether individual offences can be taken into account when proceeding under Section 55 of the Maharashtra Police Act?
Submissions/Arguments
Section 55 requires action against all members of the gang; the Externing Authority had no power to discriminate, and dropping two members vitiated the proceedings.
The four crimes (Crime Nos. 65/2000, 224/2007, 170/2007, 3164/2007) in which the petitioners were acquitted could not be relied upon as material for externment.
Individual offences registered against each petitioner should not have been considered in a gang externment proceeding under Section 55 of the Maharashtra Police Act.
Judgment Excerpts
the Externing Authority while passing the order of externment had dropped the proceedings, against the two members namely, Jaydeep Mane and Vinayak Gaikwad which was not permissible.
the Externing Authority has had no powers to discriminate between the members of the gang, once the provisions of Section 55 of the said Act are invoked.
Procedural History
The Deputy Commissioner of Police, Pimpri Division, Pune, upon scrutiny of proposal from PI Wakad, directed Assistant Commissioner of Police to hold enquiry and issue notice under Section 59 of the Maharashtra Police Act. Notices under Section 59 were issued in December 2016 to gang leader Rakesh Popat Bharne and 14 gang members, informing them of material allegations and opportunity to explain. One member, Ravindra Dhumal, could not be served. After affording opportunity, the Assistant Commissioner submitted a report dated 9.1.2017. The Deputy Commissioner issued a further notice dated 12.1.2017 for hearing, to which petitioners filed counter. On 3.2.2017, the competent authority passed an externment order against the gang leader and 13 members for one and a half years from Pune district, while dropping two members (Jaydeep Mane and Vinayak Gaikwad) because they were contesting municipal elections. Appeals under Section 60 were filed; the Divisional Commissioner, Pune, vide order dated 12.4.2017, partly allowed the appeals, confirmed the externment but reduced the period to one year. The petitioners then filed these writ petitions challenging the legality of the externment and appellate orders.
Acts & Sections
- Maharashtra Police Act, 1951: 55, 59, 60
- Indian Penal Code, 1860: Chapters XII, XVI
