TUSHAR RAMESHBHAI TADAPADA Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present petition has been filed seeking quashing of the impugned orders, whereby the petitioner has been ordered to be externed from Ahmedabad City and rural area i.e. Kheda, Mehsana, Gandhinagar for a period of 2 years. The petitioner filed an appeal against the order dtd. 9/2/2021 and by the order order dtd. 16/10/2021, the Appellate Authority modified the order of externment by restricting it to Ahmedabad City.

(2.) Learned advocate for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is sought to be externed only on the basis of registration of two FIRs for the offence punishable under Ss. 323 and 294 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short "the IPC "). It is submitted by him that the petitioner had filed filed an appeal against the show cause notice dtd. 9/12/2020 and after the aforesaid order was passed, the petitioner was acquitted in one of the offences registered under Sec. 323 of the IPC. It is further submitted that though the Appellate Authority has recorded the same, however, the impugned order externing the petitioner from Ahmedabad City has been passed. It is submitted that reliance is placed by the respondent authority on the statements of 7 witnesses in externing the petitioner, however, the same are vague in nature and do not give any specific details. It is submitted that all the witnesses have stated that the incidence as narrated therein have occurred on approximately two months before and hence, the impugned order may be set aside.

(3.) Per contra, learned APP Ms.Krina Calla has submitted that the impugned order does not require any interference since the Appellate Authority, after considering the acquittal of the petitioner in one of the offences and after considering the statements of 7 witnesses, has opined that the petitioner is required to be externed from Ahmedabad City. Thus, she has submitted that the impugned order may not be disturbed.