NAZIR KHAN Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner is knocking at the doors of writ court for assailing the externment order dtd. 25/4/2023 and the corrigendum order dtd. 27/4/2023 made by the 2nd respondent at Annexures-A & B, whereby he is restrained from entering the Shivamogga District jurisdictional limits for a period of one year. Learned counsel for the petitioner argues that the orders of the kind are violative of Article 19(1)(g) & Article 21 of the Constitution of India. He also submits that the right to reside guaranteed under Article 19(1)(e) is also affected since his client is restrained from residing in the place of his choice. He hastens to add that petitioner is law abiding and that he has been false implicated in the cases pending against him. Lastly he argues that his family depends upon his income and if the impugned order is not voided, that amounts to taking away the means of livelihood of the family.

(2.) Learned AGA on request appearing for the respondents opposes the petition making submission in justification of the impugned order and the reasons on which the same has been constructed. She points out a big list of cases relating to gambling & goonda activities in which petitioner has been involved; fairly enough she points out that he has been acquitted in six cases filed u/s.78(3) of the Karnataka Police Act and that three more cases are still pending investigation. She seeks dismissal of the writ petition.

(3.) Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and having perused the petition papers, this court declines indulgence in the matter broadly agreeing with the submission made by the learned AGA. It is not the case of petitioner that six of the ten cases have been disposed off in his favour by honourable acquittal. They are all cases decided in his favour for want of evidence and giving benefit of doubt. It is open to the authorities acting under Sec. 55 of the 1963 Act to take into account even such cases in deciding whether the person should be externed.