MEHFUJAALAM Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Notice. Learned AGP waives service of notice for and on behalf of the respondents.

(2.) At the outset, learned advocate Mr.Daiya appearing for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is externed for three months from Surat City and Surat Rural, while placing reliance on the statements of two witnesses, which are vague and unspecific. He has further submitted that one offence, which is registered under the provision of Ss. 143 , 147 , 148 , 149 , 324 , 326 and 427 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 ( IPC ) read with Sec. 135(1) of the Gujarat Police Act, 1951 is also considered, which in fact is a cross F.I.R. He has submitted that the petitioner cannot be branded as dangerous person, who can disturb the public tranquility. He has submitted that the petitioner was constrained to approach this Court, without resorting remedy of appeal since a period for filing an appeal is very short i.e. of three months and normally it takes more than four or six months to decide the appeal.

(3.) Learned APP has submitted that such ground cannot be canvased by the petitioner for avoiding statutory remedy of filing the appeal against the impugned order.