Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Sayyed Jafar Sayyed Nasir, challenged an externment order dated 23.6.2016 passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Police, Amravati City, externing him from Amravati City and Amravati Rural area for two years under the Maharashtra Police Act. The petitioner contended that the show cause notice under Section 59 of the Act did not disclose the contents of the in-camera statements of two witnesses, though it mentioned that such statements were recorded. The petitioner argued that without knowing what the witnesses stated, he could not effectively reply to the notice. The respondents supported the order, submitting that the petitioner's acts caused alarm and danger, and the witnesses were not willing to come forward. However, the Additional Public Prosecutor fairly admitted that the show cause notice did not specifically mention the in-camera statements. The Court observed that if the authority intended to rely on in-camera statements, it was necessary to disclose their substance in the show cause notice to enable the petitioner to respond. The failure to do so violated principles of natural justice. Consequently, the Court quashed and set aside the impugned externment order and allowed the petition.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Externment - Show Cause Notice - Maharashtra Police Act, 1951, Section 59 - Natural Justice - The Deputy Commissioner of Police issued a show cause notice for externment but did not mention the contents of in-camera statements of two witnesses, though a passing reference was made to their recording. The petitioner could not effectively reply. The Court held that the failure to disclose the substance of in-camera statements in the show cause notice vitiates the externment order as it deprives the noticee of an opportunity to meet the case against him. The order was quashed and set aside. (Paras 2-4)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the externment order passed under the Maharashtra Police Act is sustainable when the show cause notice fails to disclose the substance of in-camera statements of witnesses relied upon by the authority.
Final Decision
The Court quashed and set aside the impugned externment order dated 23.6.2016 passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Police, Amravati City, and allowed the writ petition.
Law Points
- Principles of natural justice
- Externment proceedings
- Show cause notice must contain material facts
- In-camera statements must be disclosed in substance
Case Details
2017 LawText (BOM) (09) 218
Criminal Writ Petition No.703 of 2017
Smt. Vasanti A Naik, M.G. Giratkar
Mr. J.B. Kasat for Petitioner, Mr. S.S. Doifode, A.P.P. for Respondents
Sayyed Jafar Sayyed Nasir
The Divisional Commissioner, Amravati and Deputy Commissioner of Police, Amravati City
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Criminal writ petition challenging an externment order passed under the Maharashtra Police Act.
Remedy Sought
Petitioner sought quashing of the externment order dated 23.6.2016 externing him from Amravati City and Amravati Rural area for two years.
Filing Reason
The show cause notice did not disclose the contents of in-camera statements of witnesses, depriving the petitioner of an opportunity to effectively reply.
Previous Decisions
The Deputy Commissioner of Police passed the externment order on 23.6.2016 after considering the proposal and in-camera statements.
Issues
Whether the externment order is sustainable when the show cause notice fails to disclose the substance of in-camera statements of witnesses.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner argued that the show cause notice under Section 59 of the Maharashtra Police Act did not mention the contents of in-camera statements, only a passing reference to their recording, making it impossible to effectively reply.
Respondents argued that the petitioner's acts caused alarm and danger, and witnesses were not willing to come forward, justifying the externment.
Ratio Decidendi
In externment proceedings under the Maharashtra Police Act, if the authority intends to rely on in-camera statements of witnesses, the show cause notice must disclose the substance of those statements to enable the noticee to effectively respond. Failure to do so violates principles of natural justice and vitiates the externment order.
Judgment Excerpts
If the Deputy Commissioner of Police wanted to rely on the incamera statements of the witnesses for externing the petitioner, it was necessary for him to mention in the show cause notice, what was stated by the witnesses when their incamera statements were recorded.
In the circumstances of the case, it would be necessary to quash and set aside the impugned order.
Procedural History
The Deputy Commissioner of Police issued a show cause notice under Section 59 of the Maharashtra Police Act, recorded in-camera statements of two witnesses, and passed the externment order on 23.6.2016. The petitioner challenged the order by filing Criminal Writ Petition No.703 of 2017 before the Bombay High Court, Nagpur Bench.
Acts & Sections
- Maharashtra Police Act, 1951: Section 59
