NAGESH GANGADHAR VIBHUTE 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 submitted that, respondent no.2 issued notice to him on 21st September, 2016 stating therein that, why externment proceedings should not be initiated against him. In the said proceedings, four offences were mentioned. However, the petitioner was already acquitted of from the said offences even before issuance of such notice. He further submits that, while conducting the proceedings by respondent no.3, there is no compliance of mandate of provisions of Section 56(1)(a) and (b) of the Maharashtra Police Act, 1951. He further submits that, the petitioner was externed from Nanded, Latur, Hingoli and Parbhani districts by respondent no.3, however, the offences from which he was already acquitted, were registered with Police Station, Dharmabad. He submits that, the appellate authority relied upon Crime No. 438 of 2014 registered with Police Station, Dharmabad under section 107 of the Code of Criminal Procedure dated 9th October, 2016, though the said crime is not mentioned in the showcause notice. He submits that, though the appellate authority partially modified the order passed by respondent no.3 and made it enforceable restricting to Nanded district only, nevertheless, the other legal aspects, as agitated by the petitioner, have not been considered by the said authority. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner pressed into service the exposition of law in the cases of Mahesh Bajrang Dalvi v. The State of Maharashtra 2017 All MR (Cri) 777, Balaji S/o Ganpati Chame v. The State of Maharashtra and others 2017 All MR (Cri)719 and Sopan Satappa Kore v. The State of Maharashtra and others 2017 All MR (Cri) 764, and submits that the Petition may be allowed.