AKHIL ANAND ARYA Vs. K V SATYAMURTHY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The impugned order of externment was passed on 3rd March, 1986 under section 56(1)(a) and (b) of the Bombay Police Act, 1951, (hereinafter referred to as the Act). Under the said order the petitioner was externed for two years from the Districts of Thane, Raigad and Greater Bombay. In appeal the State Government by its order dated 22nd May, 1986 modified the impugned order by restricting the externment to the Districts of Thane and Raigad. Being aggrieved by the appellate order, the petitioner has preferred this writ petition.

(2.) The grievance made before us is that in the first instance the two criminal cases which were filed against the petitioner arose out of the Civil disputes between the villagers and amongst the brothers inter se. The charge-sheets filed in the said criminal cases named the witnesses and also gave their addresses. The cases are still pending in the Criminal Courts. The Externing Authority has not shown as to how the witnesses were not willing to come forward to give testimony against the petitioner which is an essential requirement for passing an externment order on grounds mentioned in section 56(1)(a) and (b) of the Act.

(3.) The second contention is that the third Criminal Case which is made the basis of the Externment Order is in fact filed by the petitioner against the complainant in the first Criminal Case and yet it is held out against the petitioner and it is also averred that the witnesses in the said case are not coming forward to give evidence against the petitioner. The order is, therefore, prima facie bad in law.