SACHIN Vs. DIVISIONAL COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally with the consent of learned Advocates for the parties.

(2.) In this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for quashing the order of externment passed by the respondent No.2- Deputy Commissioner of Police, Zone-1, Amravati dtd. 3/3/2022 and the order in appeal dtd. 17/2/2023 passed by the respondent No.1-Divisional Commissioner, Amravati, District Amravati. The respondent No.2 initiated the proceedings for externment of the petitioner from Amravati District by invoking the provisions of Sec. 56(1)(a) & (b) of the Maharashtra Police Act, 1951 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act of 1951"). The respondent No.2 to record his subjective satisfaction, relied upon the following crimes. The said crimes are set out hereinbelow in tabulated form: <IMG>JUDGEMENT_641_LAWS(BOM)7_2023_1.jpg</IMG>

(3.) Besides above crimes, the respondent No.2 placed heavy reliance upon the confidential in-camera statements of two witnesses. On the basis of the crimes and the confidential in-camera statements of the witnesses, the respondent No.2 recorded a satisfaction that the activities of the petitioner are fully covered under the provisions of Sec. 56(1)(a) & (b) of the Act of 1951 and as such warranting his externment.