Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Mrunal Bhalchandra Ghodke, filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging an externment order dated 25/08/2017 passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Police, Zone-I, Nashik (the Externing Authority) under Section 56(1)(b) of the Maharashtra Police Act, 1955. The order externed the petitioner from Nashik Commissionerate area and Nashik Rural for a period of 2 years. The petitioner appealed to the Divisional Commissioner, Nashik Division (the Appellate Authority), who partly allowed the appeal and reduced the externment period to 1 year by order dated 26/10/2017. The petitioner then approached the High Court seeking to quash the externment order entirely. The background facts show that the petitioner was issued a show cause notice by the Externing Authority, which referred to five FIRs registered against the petitioner at Bhadrakali Police Station, Nashik, between 2009 and 2016. The FIRs alleged offences punishable under Sections 324, 323, 143, 147, 504 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 135 of the Maharashtra Police Act. The Externing Authority, considering that the offences fell under Chapters XVI and XVII of the IPC, passed the externment order. The petitioner replied to the show cause notice but the authority proceeded to pass the order. The Appellate Authority, while partly allowing the appeal, reduced the period to one year. The High Court, after hearing both sides, held that the externment order was valid but the period of 2 years was excessive. The court noted that the Appellate Authority had already reduced it to 1 year, which was proportionate. The court dismissed the petition, upholding the externment order as modified by the Appellate Authority.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Externment - Section 56(1)(b) Maharashtra Police Act, 1955 - Proportionality - The petitioner challenged an externment order of 2 years passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Police, which was reduced to 1 year by the Appellate Authority. The court upheld the externment but found the period of 2 years excessive, and the Appellate Authority's reduction to 1 year was deemed appropriate. Held that the externment order was valid but the period must be proportionate to the threat. (Paras 1-3)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the externment order passed under Section 56(1)(b) of the Maharashtra Police Act, 1955 was justified and whether the period of externment was proportionate.
Final Decision
The High Court dismissed the writ petition, upholding the externment order as modified by the Appellate Authority, reducing the period to one year.
Law Points
- Externment order under Section 56(1)(b) of Maharashtra Police Act
- 1955 must be proportionate
- Appellate Authority can modify period of externment
- Show cause notice must specify grounds
- FIRs under Chapters XVI and XVII IPC can justify externment
