NIKHIL SURESH RAJPUT (PATIL) Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith, and heard finally with the consent of the parties.

(2.) This Petition is filed with the following prayer :-

(3.) The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that, without recording subjective satisfaction and reasons in the externment order, the petitioner is externed from two districts i.e. Jalgaon and Dhule. It is submitted that, offences which are registered against the petitioner are in Bazar Peth Police Station at Bhusawal in Jalgaon district. It is submitted that, even the alleged prejudicial activities of the petitioner, as stated in the notice, are in the vicinity of Bazar Peth Police Station, Bhusawal. Therefore, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that, the orders passed by Respondent Nos.2 and 4 are excessive, inasmuch as, the petitioner is externed from Jalgaon and Dhule districts. In addition to this, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that, the offence bearing Crime no.102/2011 came to be registered against the petitioner with Bazar Peth Police Station, Bhusawal, Dist.Jalgaon and he has been acquitted in the said offence even before issuance of notice and the said fact has not been considered by the respondent nos.2 and 4 while externing the petitioner from two districts.