HASAN ALI ASAD ALI Vs. DIVISIONAL COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Bhangde, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. Deshmukh, learned APP for respondent/State.

(2.) The present petition challenges the order dtd. 26/10/2021 passed by the Respondent No.2, whereby the petitioner has been externed from the limits of Nagpur City for a period of two years (page 26) and the subsequent order in appeal dtd. 23/12/2021, dismissing the appeal.

(3.) Mr. Bhangde, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the show-cause notice under Ss. 56(1)(a) and 56 (1)(b) of the Maharashtra Police Act, dtd. 8/6/2021 (page 20) refers to two crimes namely, Crime No. 136/2020, which is claimed to be under the provisions of Ss. 307, 143, 147, 148, 149, 504, 506, 427 and Ss. 3+25, 4+25 of the Indian Arms Act (page 20) and the other being Crime No. 131/2021 under the provisions of Ss. 307, 326, 143, 147, 148, 149, 504, 427 of the IPC (pg 21). He submits that in so far as the Crime No. 136/2020 is concerned, the FIR does not name the applicant, nor do the impugned orders indicate that anything else, much less the charge-sheet has been taken into consideration by Respondent No.2 while passing the impugned order so as to arrive at any prima facie conclusion regarding the involvement of the applicant in the said crime. In so far as Crime No.131/2021 is concerned, he invites my attention to FIR No.130, dtd. 6/2/2021 at 7.22 a.m, to contend that the FIR in Crime No. 131 dtd. 6/2/2021 filed at 7.36 a.m is merely a counter to the FIR No.130, which is earlier in point of time. Since Ss. 56 (1) (a) & (b) of the M.P. Act are invoked, it is necessary that there should be a subjective satisfaction by the Authorities, in respect of what is contained therein, which is either that the movements or acts of the petitioner are causing or calculated to cause alarm, danger or harm to person or property or there are reasonable grounds to believe that such person is engaged or is about to be engaged in the commission of an offence involving force or violence or an offence punishable under Chapters XII, XVI or XVII of the IPC or in the abetment of such an offence and when the opinion of the competent authority that the witnesses were not willing to come forward to give evidence against such persons by reason of apprehension as to their safety, is there.