ATUL PRABHAKAR NADE Vs. SPECIAL SECRETARY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Rule returnable forthwith. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, this petition is heard finally at the stage of admission. The petitioner challenges the order of externment passed by respondent No. 2 dated 16th March, 2012 and also the order passed by the Appellate Authority/respondent No. 1 confirming the said order.

(2.) The order of externment is defended by the respondents by filing affidavit of Deputy Commissioner of Police, Zone-I, Pune City. The petitioner is involved in criminal activities and Five criminal cases under the offences punishable under sections 323, 336, 326, 452, 504, 506(ii) are registered against him and pending in the Court. Therefore, the notice under section 56(1)(b) of the Bombay Police Act, 1951 was given to him disclosing allegations and nature of the offences in various cases. It was also mentioned that the witnesses are not coming forward due to fear and terror.

(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioner based his submissions mainly on two points. Firstly, though the notice of externment was issued under section 56(1)(b), while passing order under the said section, the externing authority, in fact, has passed order taking into account the ingredients under section 56(1)(a) of the Bombay Police Act, 1951. Hence, the order is illegal. Secondly, it is necessary for the authority to mention the names of the witnesses who are against the externee. In support of his submissions, he relied on the judgments of the Division Bench of this Court in Chhotu Siddinath Kunwar vs. State of Maharashtra & Anr., 1989 Mh. L.J. and in Ayub Yusuf Mansuri vs. Sub-Divisional Mansuri vs. Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Nandurbar, 1986 1 BCR 144.