GANESH BALASAHEB CHANGLE Vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Mrs. Mhatre, learned APP, waives service on behalf of the Respondents. By consent, Rule made returnable forthwith.

(2.) On 29th March 2013, the Petitioner was served with a showcause notice issued under Section 56(1)(b) of the Bombay Police Act, 1951 asking him to show cause why he should not be externed from the limits of Nashik City, Nashik Commissionerate and Nashik Rural Districts for a period of two years. The Externing Authority passed an Externment Order in terms of that show-cause notice.

(3.) We have heard Mr. Tripathi, learned Advocate for the Petitioner, and Mrs. Mhatre, learned APP. We have also perused the petition and carefully considered the two orders under challenge. In our view, Mr. Tripathi is entirely justified in saying that although the Externment Order purports to be under Section 56(1)(b) of the Bombay Police Act, 1951, all the material in the Externment Order is under, and only under, Section 56(1)(a) of the Bombay Police Act, 1951. This was a ground of challenge specifically taken by the Petitioner before the Appellate Authority. We regret to note that the Appellate Authority has dealt with this submission in the most unsatisfactory manner in paragraph 6 of the Appellate Order. That paragraph is worth quoting in full, if only for the reason that it makes no sense whatsoever: