SANDEEP V. RAUT Vs. STATE OF GOA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this Petition, the petitioner has challenged order dtd. 27/1/2022, passed by the respondent no. 2, Magistrate, whereby externment proceedings initiated against the petitioner have been dropped, but, at the same time, the petitioner has been asked to execute a bond of good behaviour of 2,00,000/-, valid for a ? period of six months. It is also directed that if there is a breach of such bond, the petitioner shall stand externed without any further proceedings.

(2.) Mr. A.D. Bhobe has appeared on behalf of the petitioner. Since an advance copy of the Petition was served on the office of the learned Advocate General, Mr. S.G. Bhobe, learned Public Prosecutor, has appeared on behalf of the respondents.

(3.) The learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that in the externment order passed on 6/1/2022, it was recorded that there was no reason for externment of the petitioner. Yet, it was recorded that given the violent nature of the petitioner, he ought to execute a bond of good behaviour and the said directions were issued in the impugned order. It is submitted that a perusal of Sec. 109 of the Cr.P.C. would show that the Magistrate is first required to put the concerned person to notice to show cause as to why such bond for good behaviour is to be executed by him. It is further submitted that in a recent judgment in Swapnil Sakharam Parab Vs. State of Goa, 2021 Online Bom 2393, this Court in a similar situation, where a conditional order of externment was issued by the Magistrate, a Writ Petition was entertained and it was held that the approach adopted by the Magistrate was foreign to the scheme of the Goa Maintenance of Public Order and Safety Act, 1988. On this basis, it was submitted that the impugned order deserves to be set aside.