ASHRAF Vs. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard finally by consent of the learned counsel for the parties.

(2.) By this Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner is praying for quashing and setting aside the order dated 4th April, 2015 passed by Respondent No.2 in Externment Appeal No. 01/2014.

(3.) The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner confined his arguments only to one ground that, without recording subjective satisfaction and reasons in the externment order, the petitioner is externed from three districts i.e. Ahmednagar, Nashik and Pune. It is submitted that, offences which are registered against the petitioner are in the vicinity of Sangamner Police Station located at Ahmednagar district. It is submitted that, even the alleged prejudicial activities of the petitioner, as stated in the show-cause notice, are in the vicinity of Sangamner area of Ahmednagar district. Therefore, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that, the order is excessive, inasmuch as, the petitioner is externed from Nashik and Pune districts.