SANJAY Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present petition has been filed by the petitioner being aggrieved by order dated 17.12.2018 passed by the respondent No.2, whereby the statutory appeal under Madhya Pradesh Rajya Surkasha Adhiniyam, filed by the petitioner herein was dismissed by the respondent No.2 thereby affirming the order of externment dated 12.10.2018 passed by the respondent No.3 by which the petitioner was externed from the municipal limits of District Sidhi for the period of eight months.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the reasons given by the authorities below having been considered by this Court earlier in similar cases, where this Court has held that it is inadequate for the authority to merely reiterate the provisions of statute and instead, they must give specific instances with regard to the persons who were not willing to appear as witnesses before the trial Court against the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that no such specific names of the witnesses have been given in this case and therefore, the impugned order is bad in law.

(3.) Per contra, learned Govt. Advocate for the respondents/State has drawn attention of this Court to the statement of witnesses recorded by the District Magistrate during the course of externment proceedings. Witness No.3 is one Jitendra Singh, who says that in the year, 2008 there was altercation between this witness and the petitioner on account of which a case was registered against the petitioner, which was subsequently compromised by both the parties. Witness No.4 is Rajendra Prasad Dubey, who stated before the District Magistrate that he is helper in the Electricity Department and in the year 2010 when he was returning from work, he was stopped by the petitioner and his friends who beat him. He says that he had suffered injuries on account of which he reported to the police. Lastly, this witness says that presently he has no quarrel with the petitioner. Witness No.5 is Sudhir Singh who is a farmer. He says that he knows the petitioner very well and incident was happened with him in the month of March 2016, when the petitioner's cattle were grazing on the field of the witness who objected the same upon which the petitioner and his brother are stated to have assaulted this witness. On account of which, he received several injuries. He further states that on account of the injuries he received, on his left hand and his ear are not functioning properly even today. He says that he had given a report to the Police Thana, Kotwi, District Sidhi. Lastly he says that the petitioner is a hooligan and the people of village are afraid of him. He has been cross-examined by the learned counsel for the petitioner and precious little has been brought out by way of contradiction in the statement of this witness before the District Magistrate. The record of the petitioner's case is at page 26, which is part of the order passed by the District Magistrate, Sidhi on account of which the petitioner was externed.