SHAJID HUSAIN Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been preferred against the order dtd. 3/4/2019, passed in Case No. 51/01 (Old No. 51/15) year 2019 passed by the learned Court of Additional District Magistrate administration Udham Singh Nagar. By the impugned order petitioner has been directed to remove himself outside District Udham Singh Nagar, till the completion of the process of Lok-Sabha Elections, 2019. This order has been passed under Sec. 3 of the Uttar Pradesh Control of Goondas Act, 1970 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act").

(2.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned A.G.A and perused the records.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner would argue that petitioner has been leading a normal life in the society. He has no criminal record in the recent past. He has settled himself in the society. A notice under Sec. 3 of the Act was served upon him on 1/4/2019 to appear in the proceedings, on 3/4/2019 but due to ill-health, he could not appear. The petitioner had instructed his counsel to appear in the proceedings on 3/4/2019 but he also did not appear for some reasons and the impugned order was passed on 3/4/2019 without affording any reasonable opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, therefore, it is argued that the impugned order deserves to be set aside and the petition allowed. In addition to it, it has also been argued that soon after the impugned order was passed, petitioner has already moved an application on 5/4/2019 before the District Magistrate, Udham Singh Nagar for recalling the order dtd. 3/4/2019, and affording him an opportunity of hearing.