MEERA SONKAR Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India the legality and validity of the orders dated 7/12/2016 passed by respondent no.2 and 29/09/2016 passed by respondent no.3 have been challenged by the mother of the respondent no.6 whereby the respondent no.6 has been externed in terms of the provisions of section 5 (a) and (b) of the M.P. Rajya Suraksha Adhiniyam, 1990 (hereinafter shall be referred as "the Adhiniyam" in short) and the respondent no.6 has been prohibited from entering in District Jabalpur and surrounding District Seoni, Mandla, Dindori, Damoh, Katni and Narsinghpur for a period of one year.

(2.) While assailing the legality and validity of the impugned orders, counsel for the petitioner put-forth the following submissions:-

(3.) Per contra, the respondents denied the case of the petitioner and submitted that the externment order and the appellate order passed on the basis of the material available against the respondent no.6. They relied on the report of the Superintendent of Police, dated 19/06/2015 (Annexure R/1). It is also submitted that the orders have been passed after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and with due application of mind taking into consideration the six cases which were registered against the petitioner during pendency of the proceedings. He was served with show cause notice and reply was filed by him. The authority has found that in the interest of persons of the society and to maintain peace and tranquility, the proceedings were taken up under section 5 (a) and (b) of the Act, 1990.