Writ Petition No. 1127 of 2004 · Bombay High Court

Heard learned Counsel Petitioner learned A.P.P. Respondents. The challenge petition

externment section 56(1)(a)(b) Bombay Police Act,

1951. submission learned Counsel Petitioner notice issued The July 2003, authorities referred in-camera statements witnesses, a, b c without giving material particulars whatsoever statements. He pointed passing externment 3rd October 2003, reliance placed authority secret statement. submitted settled position externment illegal deserves set aside. The learned A.P.P. has supported the impugned Judgment and Orders. He law, 2 : ::: 2 : 2 :

I considered submissions. A perusal notice authority relied offences registered against Petitioner thereafter in the second last paragraph of the notice it is stated as under: "Against criminal tendencies, secret witness a,b,c have deposed before the Police. " In the order of externment passed on 3rd October 2003, the authority has observed as under: . "There secret witnesses testified against him, stated that, Accused cruel, vengeful, adament nature behaviour, threat peoples property. The witnesses petrified depose statement against him, the condition that, there statement shall be kept secret, they were testified. "

A perusal notice meerely refers secret statements witnesses a, c without giving details. General nature b material allegations statements indicated notice. All notice recites secret witnesses a, b c deposed 3 : ::: 3 : 3 : against Petitioner. However, externment a reference general allegations notice statements. Therefore, contrary requirement section 59 Bombay Police Act,

1951. Consequently, externment is illegal and is liable to be quashed and set aside.

Accordingly the following order is passed: (i) The impugned externment 3rd October 2003 (Exh.C to the petition) is quashed and set aside. (ii) Rule is made absolute accordingly. Judge. Judge. Judge.