Nafr High Court
Case Details
1 2025:CGHC:33541-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPCR No. 404 of 2025 P. Jyoti Prakash Rao @ Maddy Rao S/o Late P. Bhaskar Rao, aged about 32 years R/o Near Railway Under Bridge Tarbahar Police Station Tarbahar Bilaspur District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh versus ... Petitioner 1 - State of Chhattisgarh, through its Secretary Department of Home Affairs, Mahanadi Bhavan, Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 2 - District Magistrate Bilaspur, Nehru Chowk, Bilaspur Chhattisgarh 3 - Superintendent of Police, District Bilaspur (Chhattisgarh) ... Respondents ROHIT KUMAR CHANDRA Digitally signed by ROHIT KUMAR CHANDRA For Petitioner
Legal Reasoning
: Mr. Arjit Tiwari, Advocate For Respondents/State : Mr. Sangharsh Pandey, Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Shri Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha, Shri Bibhu Datta Guru Chief Justice , Judge Judgment on Board Per Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice 17.07.2025 1. Heard Mr. Arjit Tiwari, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. Sangharsh Pandey, learned Government Advocate, appearing for the respondents / State. 2. The petitioner has filed this petition with following prayer: “10.1) That the Hon'ble Court may please to entertain this petition and call for entire records pertaining to the case. 2 10.2) The Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue appropriate writ/order/direction for quashing the the appellate order dated 10.06.2025 passed by the Respondent No.1 affirming the order of externment;. 10.3) The Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue appropriate writ/order/direction for quashing the impugned order dated 06.02.2025 passed by the District Magistrate, Bilaspur, in the interest of justice; 10.4) Any other relief which this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper may also kindly be granted to the Petitioner, in the interest of justice. 10.5) Cost of the petition may also be granted to the Petitioner An affidavit in support of this petition is filed herewith.” 3. Prosecution story in brief is that on 21.03.2024, respondent No.2 issued a show cause Notice to the petitioner herein stating that petitioner is being involved in criminal activities since year 2020 and petitioner always remains in company of unsocial elements and involved himself in act of rioting, assaulting, criminal intimidation, political and communal activities and disturbance of peace and tranquility of the area and such activities of the petitioner has become danger for the maintenance of public order and on account of these activities the civilians are scared of the petitioner and fear to make report, which amounting to endanger to the law and order of State. In the said show cause notice, along with the notice a communication was also mentioned which was 3 made by the Superintendent of Police, Bilaspur to the Respondent No.2 in which list of cases which were registered, further recommending initiation proceedings under Sections 3 and 5 of the Chhattisgarh Rajya Suraksha Adhiniyam, 1990. The show cause notice referred to several past criminal cases against the petitioner. In response, the petitioner submitted a detailed reply. The learned Respondent No.2 passed an order dated 06.02.2025, directing expulsion of the petitioner for 6 months, solely relying on the police report and past allegations. Aggrieved by the said externment order, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the State Government under Section 9 of the Chhattisgarh Rajya Suraksha Adhiniyam, 1990, submitting that in several of the cases referred by the Superintendent of Police, he had already been acquitted by competent courts of law, and the remaining were of minor nature. The Appellate Authority dismissed the petitioner's appeal vide order dated 10.06.2025, thereby affirming the impugned externment order passed by the Respondent No.2. Hence this petition. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is nothing on record to show that the petitioner is acting or likely to act in manner prejudicial to the Security of the State or the maintenance of public order and in order to prevent him from acting in the interest general public such proceedings have been initiated. Further, no preliminary enquiry has been conducted by the respondent No. 1 before issuing show Cause Notice dated 4 21.03.2024. The petitioner belongs to poor family and in most of criminal cases registered against him, he has been acquitted from criminal cases and since long he is not involved in any case. It is further submitted that petitioner is having family members and he is living with his family in a peaceful manner and the parents of the petitioner are old person suffering from several diseases, therefore, petitioner is required for assistant of his family members, thus, Petitioner may not be externed. Also, the respondent No.1 failed to appreciate the fact that the alleged cases registered against the Petitioner are not grievous in nature and the same are baseless, and therefore, the report/complaint filed by the Superintendent of Police being vague deserves to be cancelled. The learned Respondent No.2 without considering the reply of petitioner, only on the basis of report of Superintendent of Police, without recording statement of Station House Officer of concerned Police Station, has passed the impugned order on 06.02.2025 for externment of Petitioner, which is liable to be quashed. Lastly, out of 06 months of externment period, the petitioner has already undergone 05 months, hence he prays for quashment of impugned externment order dated 10.06.2025. 5. On the other hand, learned counsel for respondent / State opposed the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner and submits that order of externment is just and proper which do not require any interference by this Court. 5 6. We have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the prayers and pleadings made in this petition. 7. Perusal of the records shows that total 4 cases were registered against the present petitioner, out of which, in two of the cases, the petitioner has already been acquitted and further out of 06 months exterment period, he has already undergone 05 months. 8. Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the view that the petitioner should be granted an opportunity to reform himself and the order of externment passed by the District Magistrate, Bilaspur on the basis of report of Superintendent of Police, Bilaspur needs to be modified to the extent that the period of externment is reduced to the period already undergone by the petitioner. It is ordered accordingly. 9. With the aforesaid observation, the writ petition stands
Decision
disposed of. Sd/- Sd/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Chandra