Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Dattatraya Ramchandra Jadhav, challenged an externment order dated 15th October 2012 passed by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Satara, externing him from Satara District for two years, and the appellate order dated 22nd March 2013 confirming the externment. The petitioner contended that he was not served with any show cause notice and was denied an opportunity to defend himself in the externment proceedings. His mother had informed the inquiry officer about his inability to attend due to mental illness, but this was ignored. The petitioner also argued that the externment was under Section 57(1)(a) of the Bombay Police Act, 1951, but the requirements of that provision were not fulfilled. The court, after hearing the parties, found that the petitioner had not been given a show cause notice or an opportunity of hearing, violating principles of natural justice. Additionally, the court noted that the conditions precedent for externment under Section 57(1)(a) were not satisfied. Consequently, the court quashed the externment order and the appellate order, allowing the petition.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Externment - Section 57(1)(a) Bombay Police Act, 1951 - Principles of Natural Justice - Show Cause Notice - The petitioner was externed without being served with any show cause notice and without being given an opportunity to defend himself, which violated the principles of natural justice. The court held that the failure to provide a show cause notice and a hearing vitiates the externment proceedings. (Paras 1-4)
B) Criminal Law - Externment - Section 57(1)(a) Bombay Police Act, 1951 - Conditions Precedent - The requirement of sub-section 1(a) of Section 57 was not fulfilled as there was no evidence that the petitioner was a habitual offender or that his movements were causing alarm or danger to public order. The court held that the basic conditions for externment were not met. (Paras 1-4)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the externment order passed under Section 57(1)(a) of the Bombay Police Act, 1951 is valid when the petitioner was not served with a show cause notice and was denied an opportunity of hearing, and whether the conditions precedent for externment under Section 57(1)(a) were satisfied.
Final Decision
The petition is allowed. The externment order dated 15th October 2012 and the appellate order dated 22nd March 2013 are quashed and set aside.
Law Points
- Principles of natural justice
- Section 57(1)(a) Bombay Police Act
- 1951
- Externment proceedings
- Show cause notice
- Opportunity of hearing
- Habitual offender
- Public order
Case Details
2013 LawText (BOM) (08) 107
Criminal Writ Petition No.1666 of 2013
S.C. Dharmadhikari, S.B. Shukre
Mr. Kuldeep Patil with Shailesh Chavan i/b. Shrikant Hutagikar for the petitioner, Mr. K.V. Saste, A.P.P. for the State
Dattatraya Ramchandra Jadhav
The State of Maharashtra, Secretary (Special), Home Department, State of Maharashtra, Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Satara Sub-Magistrate, Satara, Senior Police Inspector, City Police Station
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Criminal writ petition challenging externment order and appellate order under Bombay Police Act, 1951
Remedy Sought
Quashing of externment order dated 15th October 2012 and appellate order dated 22nd March 2013
Filing Reason
Petitioner was externed without show cause notice and opportunity of hearing, and conditions of Section 57(1)(a) were not fulfilled
Previous Decisions
Externment order by Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Satara on 15th October 2012; confirmed by appellate authority on 22nd March 2013
Issues
Whether the externment order was passed in violation of principles of natural justice due to lack of show cause notice and opportunity of hearing?
Whether the conditions precedent under Section 57(1)(a) of the Bombay Police Act, 1951 were satisfied?
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner argued that he was not served with any show cause notice and was denied opportunity to defend himself; his mother informed inquiry officer about his mental illness but was ignored.
Petitioner argued that requirement of Section 57(1)(a) was not fulfilled.
State argued through APP, but no specific submissions recorded in the judgment.
Ratio Decidendi
An externment order under Section 57(1)(a) of the Bombay Police Act, 1951 must be preceded by a show cause notice and an opportunity of hearing, and the conditions precedent of the provision must be satisfied. Failure to do so vitiates the proceedings.
Judgment Excerpts
It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has not been served with any show cause notice and has been denied an opportunity to defend himself in the externment proceedings initiated against him.
He has further submitted that the petitioner has been externed under Section 57(1)(a) of the Bombay Police Act, 1951 ... but requirement of sub-section 1(a) has not at all been fulfilled in this case.
Procedural History
The Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Satara passed an externment order on 15th October 2012 externing the petitioner from Satara District for 2 years. The petitioner appealed, and the appellate authority confirmed the order on 22nd March 2013. The petitioner then filed the present criminal writ petition in the High Court of Bombay on 30th July 2013, which was heard finally at the admission stage with consent of parties, and judgment was pronounced on 21st August 2013.
Acts & Sections
- Bombay Police Act, 1951: 57(1)(a)
