HC strikes down externment order, says it is excessive

Image
Press Trust of India Mumbai
Last Updated : Nov 09 2013 | 10:42 AM IST
The Bombay High Court has struck down a top-ranking police officer's order externing a 29-year- old person from the limits of Mumbai and adjoining districts of Thane and Raigad, terming it as "excessive".
A Bench of Justices S C Dharmadhikari and Gautam Patel, in a recent judgement, also quashed the order passed by the appellate authority confirming the externment proceedings against Krishna alias Gotia Bajarang Chikne, a resident of Govandi in Northeast Mumbai who faces several criminal cases.
On March 11 this year, Assistant Commissioner of Police, Chembur, issued a show-cause notice to Krishna, proposing his externment from the districts of Greater Mumbai, Mumbai Suburban, Thane and Raigad for two years.
Thereafter, on June 11, Deputy Commissioner of Police (Zone VI), Mumbai, issued an externment order against Krishna under the Bombay Police Act in terms of the notice. He filed an appeal which was dismissed by the appellate authority on August 28. Krishna then moved the HC against the order.
The petitioner's lawyer, U N Tripathi, argued that the order was clearly excessive as it externed his client from a vast area covering Mumbai, Mumbai Suburban, Thane and Raigad districts.
The Judges noted, "in our view, this submission (that order was excessive) is well-founded."
The Bench noted that the externment order and the show cause notice referred to a number of criminal cases registered against the petitioner. However, all of these are within the local limits of Shivaji Nagar and Deonar Police Stations.
"There is no material whatsoever, in either the externment order or the Appellate Order, justifying the externment of the petitioner from such a vast geographical area," the Judges remarked.
When this point about the order being too harsh was argued before the appellate authority, the latter dealt with it in a most cursory manner, they noted. "We find this to be entirely unsatisfactory, and incorrect in law."
It is ordinarily for the authorities to decide what is the area from which a person should be externed and for how long, the Bench said.
"However, any order of the externment must be non- arbitrary and cannot be excessive. It cannot be more than the situation demands. In this case, the petitioner has been externed for a period of two years, and that too from a vast geographical area.
*Subscribe to Business Standard digital and get complimentary access to The New York Times

Smart Quarterly

₹900

3 Months

₹300/Month

SAVE 25%

Smart Essential

₹2,700

1 Year

₹225/Month

SAVE 46%
*Complimentary New York Times access for the 2nd year will be given after 12 months

Super Saver

₹3,900

2 Years

₹162/Month

Subscribe

Renews automatically, cancel anytime

Here’s what’s included in our digital subscription plans

Exclusive premium stories online

  • Over 30 premium stories daily, handpicked by our editors

Complimentary Access to The New York Times

  • News, Games, Cooking, Audio, Wirecutter & The Athletic

Business Standard Epaper

  • Digital replica of our daily newspaper — with options to read, save, and share

Curated Newsletters

  • Insights on markets, finance, politics, tech, and more delivered to your inbox

Market Analysis & Investment Insights

  • In-depth market analysis & insights with access to The Smart Investor

Archives

  • Repository of articles and publications dating back to 1997

Ad-free Reading

  • Uninterrupted reading experience with no advertisements

Seamless Access Across All Devices

  • Access Business Standard across devices — mobile, tablet, or PC, via web or app

More From This Section

First Published: Nov 09 2013 | 10:42 AM IST

Next Story