HARIJAN RATILAL MALABHAI Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This special criminal application is to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropri- ate writ direction or order in order to quash and set aside the order dated 11-7-1989 passed by the respondent No. 2 at Annexure-C to the petition. In and by the externment order which is at Annexure-C to the special criminal application the externing authority who is the Sub- Divisional Magistrate Vadhwan Sub-Division Surendranagar in exercise of his power conferred under Section 57(c) of the Bombay Police Act 1951 passed an order of externment externing the petitioner herein for a period of 2 years from the limits of Surendranagar District. Appeal thereof filed under Section 60 of the Act was dismissed by the Government of Gujarat by an order dated 17-10-1989 which is at Annexure-F to the special criminal application. Aggrieved by these orders the petitioner has preferred the present special criminal application.

(2.) Various contentions have been raised in the Special Criminal Application and Mr. D. M. Thakkar learned counsel for the petitioner stresses the point regarding the failure on the part of the externing authority to get himself satisfied with regard to the seriousness of the offence committed by the petitioner and the degree of harm his presence in the society will cause to the public at large. Mr. Thakkar also states that the externing authority has failed to consider the question as to how the petitioner will be of public menace if he is not externed from the locality. The learned Counsel for the petitioner has also pointed out that particulars of the convictions of the petitioner herein in respect of various cases filed against him have not been given and that according to the learned Counsel has vitiated the order of externment. As regards this contention it is clear from the facts of the case that the petitioner was served with a show cause notice with a schedule regarding the offences committed by him and the convictions accorded to him in the Court of law. Hence we do not think that this contention can be looked into for the purpose of setting aside the order of externment.

(3.) We have carefully considered the first argument of Mr. D. M. Thakkar regarding the subjective satisfaction the authority has to make before any order of externment is passed. The show-cause notice which is issued under Section 59 of the Bombay Police Act only states that: ...