Ms. Rajni Bala Khanna, Ms. Laimon Rani Bomo and Mr. Amit Panwar, Advocates v. THE STATE OF NCT OF DELHI

W.P.(CRL) 2601/2024 Page 1 of 4 $~18 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(CRL) 2601/2024 & CRL.M.A. 38534/2024 JUGESH .....Petitioner Through: Ms. Rajni Bala Khanna, Ms. Laimon Rani Bomo and Mr. Amit Panwar, Advocates versus THE STATE OF NCT OF DELHI .....Respondent Through: Mr. Sanjeev Bhandari, ASC for the State with Mr. Arjit Sharma, Mr. Nikunj Bindal, Advocates SI Sandeep Kumar, P.S. Ambedkar Nagar CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA O R D E R % 08.01.2025 1. This petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking setting aside of the externment order dated 25.04.2024 passed by the Court of learned Addl. Dy. Commissioner of Police: I, South District, New Delhi and the order dated 10.07.2024 passed by the Lieutenant Governor, Delhi in Appeal no. 97/2024, under Section 51 of the Delhi Police Act, 1978. 2. Learned counsel for the Petitioner states that whereas learned Addl. Dy. Commissioner of Police vide order dated 25.04.2024 was pleased to order the period of externment for nine (9) months, the Lieutenant Governor in the appeal has enhanced the period of nine (9) months to one (1) year vide order dated 10.07.2024. 2.1 She states that the Petitioner has already undergone substantial period of externment and the period of nine (9) months shall expire on 24.01.2025. This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 02/07/2025 at 00:31:47 W.P.(CRL) 2601/2024 Page 2 of 4 2.2 She states that in the present writ petition, in view of these facts, she is confining her prayer only to challenge the order dated 10.07.2024 to the extent that it enhances the period of externment from nine (9) months to one (1) year. 2.3 She states that it is a matter of record that while hearing the appeal, no prior notice was given to the Petitioner that the Lieutenant Governor intended to enhance the period of externment from nine (9) months to one (1) year. She states that this would be in violation of the principles of natural justice as is engrafted in the Section 427 of The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (analogous provision of Section 386 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973) which reads as under: “427. After perusing such record and hearing the appellant or his advocate, if he appears, and the Public Prosecutor if he appears, and in case of an appeal under section 418 or section 419, the accused, if he appears, the Appellate Court may, if it considers that there is no sufficient ground for interfering, dismiss the appeal, or may--- (a) in an appeal from an order of acquittal, reverse such order and direct that further inquiry be made, or that the accused be re-tried or committed for trial, as the case may be, or find him guilty and pass sentence on him according to law; (b) in an appeal from a conviction--- (i) reverse the finding and sentence and acquit or discharge the accused, or order him to be re-tried by a Court of competent jurisdiction subordinate to such Appellate Court or committed for trial; or (ii) alter the finding, maintaining the sentence; or (iii) with or without altering the finding, alter the nature or the extent, or the nature and extent, of the sentence, but not so as to enhance the same; (c) in an appeal for enhancement of sentence--- (i) reverse the finding and sentence and acquit or discharge the accused or order him to be re-tried by a Court competent to try the offence; or (ii) alter the finding maintaining the sentence; or This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 02/07/2025 at 00:31:47 W.P.(CRL) 2601/2024 Page 3 of 4 (iii) with or without altering the finding, alter the nature or the extent, or, the nature and extent, of the sentence, so as to enhance or reduce the same; (d) in an appeal from any other order, alter or reverse such order; (e) make any amendment or any consequential or incidental order that may be just or proper: Provided that the sentence shall not be enhanced unless the accused has had an opportunity of showing cause against such enhancement: Provided further that the Appellate Court shall not inflict greater punishment for the offence which in its opinion the accused has committed, than might have been inflicted for that offence by the Court passing the order or sentence under appeal.” 3. Learned ASC for the State fairly submits that there is no order on the record evidencing that any opportunity of show cause against the proposed enhancement was granted to the Petitioner, whereby the Petitioner was put to notice that the Lieutenant Governor intended to enhance the sentence from nine (9) months to one (1) year. 4. Section 427(b)(iii) of BNSS categorically bars enhancement of the sentence in an appeal filed against conviction. So also, the proviso to Section 427(e) stipulates that the appellate Court before enhancing a sentence will grant an opportunity of show-cause to the accused. 5. The impugned externment proceedings were initiated against the Petitioner under Section 47 of the Delhi Police Act, 1978 (‘DP Act’) leading to the passing of the order dated 25.04.2024. The Petitioner filed an appeal against the order of externment to the Lieutenant Governor under Section 51 of the DP Act. Section 51(3) records the mandate that the Lieutenant Governor is obliged to give a reasonable opportunity to the Appellant while hearing the appeal and before passing the final order. In the facts of the present case, it is admitted that no notice of the intention to This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 02/07/2025 at 00:31:47 W.P.(CRL) 2601/2024 Page 4 of 4 enhance the sentence was issued by the Lieutenant Governor to the Petitioner herein. 6. Keeping in view the aforesaid facts of this case, this Court finds merit in the submission of the Petitioner that the order of the Lieutenant Governor to the limited extent that it enhanced the period of externment from nine (9) months to one (1) year is contrary to the principles of natural justice as enshrined in Section 51(3) of the DP Act. and accordingly, to that limited extent the order of the Lieutenant Governor enhancing the period of externment is set aside. However, the finding in the order of the Lieutenant Governor upholding the order dated 25.04.2024 is upheld. 7. With the aforesaid observations, the petition stands partly allowed. 8. It is therefore, clarified that the order of the Addl. Dy. Commissioner of Police dated 25.04.2024 has not been interfered with and the order shall remain operative. Accordingly, the externment of the Petitioner from NCT of Delhi will cease on 24.01.2025, in accordance with law. 9. Pending applications stand disposed of. 10. The digitally signed copy of this order, duly uploaded on the official website of the Delhi High Court, www.delhihighcourt.nic.in, shall be treated as a certified copy of the order for the purpose of ensuring compliance. No physical copy of order shall be insisted by any authority/entity or litigant. MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA, J JANUARY 8, 2025/msh/sk