MANOJ KUMAR @ MONU Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has preferred the present writ petition to assail the order dated 02.06.2016 passed under Sec. 50 of Delhi Police Act, 1978, by the Additional Deputy Commissioner of Police, North East District, Delhi, as also the order dated 24.08.2016 under Sec. 51 of the Delhi Police Act, 1978, passed by Honourable Lieutenant Government, Delhi. By the first order, the petitioner was externed from NCT of Delhi for a period of one year with effect from 09.06.2016. By the second order, his statutory appeal has been dismissed by the Honourable Lieutenant Governor.

(2.) The impugned order dated 02.06.2016 itself narrates the circumstances and background in which the petitioner was noticed under Sec. 47 of the Delhi Police Act. The relevant extract from the impugned order dated 02.06.2016 is reproduced as under:

(3.) The petitioner filed his reply to the said show cause notice under Sec. 47 of the Delhi Police Act, on his own. The same is available on the record produced by the respondent/State. In this reply, in relation to the first nine cases tabulated herein above, the petitioner stated, to the effect, that he had been acquitted/ discharged therein. Here itself, I may observe that the petitioner's claim of acquittal/discharge-at least in respect of three cases, was not correct inasmuch, as, he stands convicted in cases at serial Nos. 2, 4, and 6 as is evident from the record. In relation to case at serial Nos. 9 to 13, the petitioner stated that he was on bail. He denied that he is a danger to the society. He stated that he is a peaceful and law abiding citizen and that he is married having three children. He denied the other allegations levelled in the notice. The impugned order shows that the petitioner appeared on his own and did not engage a counsel despite repeated opportunities. The Additional Deputy Commissioner of Police gave the following reasons for passing of the said order: