ASLAM PASHA Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner is knocking at the doors of Writ Court for laying a challenge to the Externment Order dtd. 12/4/2023 made by the Assistant Commissioner at Annexure-A whereby he is banished from the Kollegala Sub-Division Area to Bellary District, during the period between12/4/2023 & 11/10/2023. Learned counsel for the Petitioner vehemently argues that the externment orders do not augur well to a Welfare State, they being the relics of Colonial Era. He also submits that such orders cannot be casually passed merely because, a citizen is implicated in a criminal case, which at times may prove to be false. He also highlights the possible difficulties an externed candidate is put to, in terms of employment and family relations. Lastly, he complained about the pendency of the appeal before the Government against the said order.

(2.) Learned AGA on request appearing for the Respondents vehemently opposes the Petition contending that Petitioner has been involved in a murder case in Crime No..198/2020 of Gundlupete Police; wherein machete has been used to kill one Mr. Mujibul Rehman and cause grievous hurt to many others; the police after investigation have filed the Charge Sheet and the Additional Sessions Judge, Chamarajanagara has registered the case in S.C. No.5018/2022; he also points out about Petitioner threatening the Prosecution Witnesses and the members of public. Learned AGA further submits that Crime No.512/2018 was registered by Gundlupete Police against the Petitioner and others for Offences p/u/ss. 143, 341, 323, 504, 506 r/w 149 of IPC; Charge Sheet was filed by the police after investigation and C.C.No.44/2019 having been tried, Petitioner came to be acquitted giving benefit of doubt. That being the position, this Court should decline indulgence, showing due deference to the orders of the Executive. Lastly, he also agrees to instruct his client to hear & dispose off Petitioner's pending appeal.

(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 of learned AGA. He is right in telling the Court that once a citizen is accused of a heinous offence like murder, grievous hurt to many and the police after investigation have filed the Charge Sheet, the authorities are more than justified in directing externment provided that the accused is disturbing the public peace or threatening the Prosecution Witnesses. He is also right in contending that even a case of acquittal on the basis of reasonable doubt can also be looked into by the authority who passes externment orders, when there is prima facie culpable conduct that poses threat to the public at large.