SUMER CHAND Vs. MAXWELL PEREIRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution challenging the order dated 19th July 1984 passed by respondent No. I under section 47 of Delhi Police Act directing that the petitioner be externed from the limits of North District of the Union Terriory of Delhi for a period of two years within seven days from the date of the order and not to enter the said limits within two years excepting with the prior permissions.

(2.) The challenge to the externment order has been thrown on various grounds. In short, it is stated that the order is arbitrary and has been made without any basis. The affidavit submitted by the SHO Sabzi Mandi on the basis of knowledge derived from official record states that the petitioner was involved in a number of cases and is a desperate character of the area and his movements are causing harm, alarm and danger to the residents of the locality and the area. It is further stated that the witnesses including the camera witnesses are not willing to come forward to depose against him in public for fear of their safety. It is further stated that there were and are eight cases of serious nature which have either been compromised due to pressure and defiance of law by the petitioner or have been dismissed for want of witnesses not coming forward due to the terror created by the petitioner.

(3.) This petition had been assigned to Mr. R.P. Lao. He was in his office when he was sent for but he did not turn up. Under these circumstances I sent for Mr. Sodhi Teja Singh. Mr. Sodhi Teja Singh in the absence of the petitioner's counsel has very fairly taken me through the record. The notice undersections 47/50 of Delhi Police Act shows that from 1977 to 1981, eight cases were registered against the petitioner, four of them being under Arms Act and one under the Gambling Act. Three cases were under sections 325/34, 324/34, and 448/380 IPC. The contents of the notice show that the petitioner was asked to show cause as to why action under section 47 of Delhi Police Act be not taken against him in view of the fact that since July 1977 within the jurisdiction of police station Sabzi Mandi and the ad-joining areas his movements and acts are causing alarm and danger to the residents of the aforesaid locality. He was also informed by the notice about his involvement in the aforesaid eight cases and was told that the witnesses including camera witnesses are not forthcoming in the above mentioned cases and are not willing to tender evidence for fear of their own safety.