LAXMANSINGH VIR BAHADURSINGH GURKHA Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner by this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has challenged the externment order No. 19/86 dated March 29 1988 by the Deputy Commissioner of Police Ahmedabad City passed under Section 56 Bombay Police Act 1951 duly confirmed in Appeal by the State Government.

(2.) The Deputy Commissioner of Police Crime Branch Ahmedabad City Mr. V. V. Rabari under the order of the Commissioner of Police under subsection (2) of Section 10 of the Bombay Police Act exercises and performs the powers and duties conferred on the Commissioner of Police under Section 56 Bombay Police Act and accordingly exercised the power under Section 56 of the Act. The Superintendent of Police (GA) Division Ahmedabad City served the notice dated July 4 1986 under Section 59 of the Bombay Police Act to the petitioner containing the general nature of the material allegations against the petitioner and affording petitioner opportunity of tendering the explanation regarding the charges against him. The charges against the the petitioner as specified in the notice are that the petitioner is a dangerous and violent person and commits the acts of force and violence in the area of New Cotton Char-rasta Bhilwada Char-rasta near Swastik factory near Amraiwadi Telawdi near Amraiwadi Azad-chowk Urinal near Gulabnagar Char-rasta Opp. Amraiwadi Post Office and on the road from Silver Mill to New Cotton Mills which falls under the jurisdiction of Amraiwadi Police Station and Gomtipur Police Station since January 1985. The specific charges in the notice are that the petitioner extorts money from the people residing in the localities specified in the notice and from innocent persons passing through the said areas by pointing out deadly weapons like knife and razor and putting them to threats of murder and that the petitioner caused physical injury to the residents of the said localities or passers-by from the said locality threatening them to kill on the suspicion that they informed the police of the illegal activities about liquor and charas and that the petitioner even though purchases eatable and other articles from the vendors carrying on business of hotelier Pan-bidi and eatables does not pay the prices of such articles and on demand the petitioner threatened them to commit murder. It is further stated in the notice that in spite of the petitioner committing such offences the witnesses not willing to come forward to give evidence in public against him as they were afraid of the safety of their person and property. By the Notice it was proposed to extern the petitioner for the period of two years from territory falling within the jurisdiction of Commissioner of Police Ahmedabad City and its contiguous area of Ahmedabad Rural Gandhinagar Kheda and Mehsana districts and that if the petitioner is not externed from the said areas it was apprehended that he would continue illegal and violent activities through the companions and agents in the above referred areas.

(3.) The petitioner appeared and submitted written statement; tendered the explanation and examined his witnesses. The papers were then submitted to the Deputy Commissioner of Police who on considering the charges against the petitioner and the explanation and evidence produced by the petitioner was subjectively satisfied that the petitioner is a dangerous and violent person and indulges in the commission of the offence involving force and violence since January 1985 in the above referred localities and that the witnesses were not willing to come forward to give evidence in public against the petitioner by reason of the apprehension on their part as regards the safety of their person and property. The Deputy Commissioner of Police accordingly in exercise of the power conferred under Section 56 Bombay Police Act by order dated March 28 1988 directed the petitioner to leave within two days the area within the jurisdiction of the Commissioner of Police Ahmedabad City and its contiguous area of Ahmedabad Rural Gandhinagar Kheda and Mehsana Districts and not to enter or return to the said territory for the period of two years without the written permission of the authorised officer. For externing the petitioner from the contiguous area the Commissioner of Police recorded reason that in case he is not externed from the contiguous Districts the petitioner would continue his such activities through companions and agents from the surrounding district. The petitioner preferred Appeal to the State Government in Home Department which was rejected by the Government on May 16 1988 and the externment order is executed on the petitioner.