HARCHARAN SINGH Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this writ petition the petitioner calls in question the order of the DCP (North-East) dated July 16, 1999, whereby the petitioner has been externed from the NCT of Delhi for a period of two years and the order of Lt. Governor dated August 18, 1999, by which the order of the DCP (North-East) was upheld.

(2.) On May 3, 1999 DCP (North-East) issued a notice to the petitioner under section 50 of the Delhi Police Act, 1978 (for short 'the Act') calling upon him to show cause why he should not be externed from the NCT of Delhi on the ground of his involvement in 22 criminal cases. The petitioner filed reply to the show cause notice and also produced two defence witnesses in support of his case. However, the DCP ( North-East) passed the order of externment against the petitioner on July 16, 1999 on the ground of his complicity in large number of criminal cases. On the basis of material before him, he came to the conclusion that the petitioner was "actively" involved in criminal cases" and was not likely to reform himself. He also came to the conclusion that the activities of the petitioner were causing alarm, harm and danger to the citizens of the NCT of Delhi. The petitioner not being satisfied with the order passed by the DCP (North-East), filed an appeal under section 51 of the Act before the Lt. Governor of Delhi. The Lt. Governor after hearing the counsel for the petitioner and Senior Public Prosecutor for the Deputy Commissioner of Police, upheld the order of DCP (North-East) vide impugned order dated August 18, 1999.

(3.) Mr. Sharma, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner pointed out that the petitioner stood acquitted in 21 cases even prior to the notice issued to him under section 50 of the Act. HE also pointed out that in the remaining case even challan has not been filed. Learned counsel urged that the cases in which he was tried and acquitted cannot form the basis for an action for externment under section 47 of the Act. He also canvassed that one of the cases being FIR No. 263 of 1992 under sections 327/328/506/34 IPC, was registered against the petitioner on August 3, 1992 but even that case has been made a basis for his externment. Learned counsel submitted that the said instance furnished by the petitioner was too remote in point of time.