JAVED SHAH Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been preferred by the petitioner being aggrieved by the order dtd. 21/3/2025 passed by the District Magistrate, Ujjain externing him for a period of one year with effect from the date of order from the revenue limits of Districts Ujjain and all contiguous Districts in exercise of powers under Sec. 5(a) (b) of M.P. Rajya Suraksha Adhiniyam, 1990 (hereinafter referred as the 'Adhiniyam'). The petitioner has also challenged the order dtd. 7/7/2025 (Annexure P/3) passed by the Commissioner, Ujjain Division, Ujjain, whereby his appeal preferred against the order dtd. 21/3/2025 under Sec. 9 of the Adhiniyam has been dismissed.

(2.) The facts of the case show that on the basis of report of Superintendent of Police, District Ujjain dtd. 22/9/2023, a show cause notice for externment was issued to the petitioner by the District Magistrate under Sec. 8(1) of the Adhiniyam. The petitioner filed his reply to the said notice after which the District Magistrate passed his order on 21/3/2025 which has been affirmed by the Commissioner by the impugned order.

(3.) It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the impugned order of externment has been passed only on the basis of number of cases registered against the petitioner. No satisfaction has been recorded of existence of grounds of externment on the basis of the available material. The externment order is contrary to the provisions of the Adhiniyam. There is no objective consideration by the competent authority. The order is contrary to the law laid down by Division Bench of this Court in Ashok Kumar V/s. State ofM.P., 2009 (4) MPLJ 434 and various other decisions on the same point. The authorities have failed to record satisfaction in the impugned orders regarding requirement of Sec. 5 of the Adhiniyam.