ILHAN Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition is filed under Sec. 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 praying to quash the externment order dtd. 28/5/2025 passed against the petitioner in CHP/Vi.Ka.Da/COP/Hu- Dha/GADIPARU/52/2025 passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Police (Law and Order) and Special Executive Magistrate, Hubballi respondent No.2 under Sec. 55 of the Karnataka Police Act, 1963 (hereinafter referred to as "K.P. Act" for brevity).

(2.) The petitioner is performing private work and he is residing at Balaji Math, Bara Imamgalli, Dharwad and he alleged to have been involved in various cases under NDPS Act. On 28/5/2025, the Police Inspector(Respondent No.4), Dharwad Town Police Station by filing petition under Sec. 55 of the K.P. Act before the Deputy Commissioner of Police (Law and Order) and Special Executive Magistrate, Hubballi alleging that the petitioner being involved in several cases and being a rowdy sheeter sought externment order. The Deputy Commissioner of Police (Law and Order) and Special Executive Magistrate, Hubballi (respondent No.2) issued show cause notices dtd. 5/5/2025 to the petitioner under Sec. 58 of K.P. Act seeking reply from the petitioner as to why the petitioner should not be exiled from Hubballi. On 28/5/2025, respondent No.2 has passed externment order against the petitioner directing the Police to send the petitioner out of Hubballi Dharwad Police Commissionerate to Kalburgi District, Kalburgi Town Chowk Police Station for a period of six months from 28/5/2025 till 27/11/2025. The petitioner has sought quashing of the said order in this petition.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that there are no grounds made out in the entire order passed by respondent No.2 warranting exile of the petitioner or to invoke such stringent measures. There is no allegation against the petitioner of committing any of offences under the Indian Penal Code to attract Sec. 55 of the K.P. Act. There is no allegation of any danger or harm to persons or property by the petitioner. The order of externment has curtailed movement of the petitioner. He contends that even though the appeal is provided under Sec. 59 of the K.P. Act, the petition under Sec. 482 of Cr.P.C. / 528 of BNSS is maintainable. On these grounds he prayed for quashing of the impugned order of externment passed by respondent No.2 under Sec. 55 of the K.P. Act.