Writ Petition No. 729 of 2025 · Bombaybench High Court · 2025

( 2 ) WP-729-2025ORDER :-1.Heard Mr. Hange, the learned Advocate for the petitioner, andSmt. Deshmukh, the learned APP for Respondent-State. The petition istaken up for final disposal at the stage of admission with the consent ofthe parties. 2.The present writ petition arises out of proceedings under Section56(1)(b) of the Maharashtra Police Act, 1951 (for short, “the said Act”).The petition challenges the action of externment passed by the learnedDeputy Commissioner of Police, Zone-II, Chh. Sambhajinagar dated 31stJanuary 2025 and confirmed by the learned Divisional Commissioner,Chh. Sambhajinagar, by his judgment and order dated 16th April 2025 inan appeal.3.The facts giving rise to the present petition are that the petitionerwas served with a show cause notice dated 4th December 2024 by theAssistant Police Commissioner, CIDCO Division, Chh. Sambhajinagar. Itis stated in the said notice that the activities of the petitioner areEthape ( 3 ) WP-729-2025dangerous to the society, and that the people in the society areapprehending danger or threat to their life and property. The people inthe society are not coming forward to give statements against thepetitioner, etc. Say was called of the petitioner. It is further consideredthat the following offences were pending against the petitioner. (i) C.R. No.61/2023 dated 31st March 2023, registered withHarsool Police Station, for offences under Sections 326, 141,143, 147, 149, 201 of IPC;(ii) C.R. No.218/2024 dated 18th August 2024 registered withHarsool Police Station for offences under Sections 108,351(2), 351(3), 3(5) of BNS and; (iii) C.R. No.221/2024 dated 21st August 2024 registered withHarsool Police Station for offences under Sections 3, 4 and 25of the Arms Act and Section 135 of Maharashtra Police Act. 4.The action of externment from Chh. Sambhajinagar City anddistrict for two years was proposed. The petitioner appeared by filing saydated 13th December 2024. The petitioner stated that the offence in C.R.No.61/2023 is filed with a political motive and due to vengeance, as theEthape ( 4 ) WP-729-2025petitioner happens to be a Member of Gram Panchayat Ohargaon. Hecontended that it was a counter-blast to a complaint filed against theinformant by some of the relatives of the petitioner. So far as CrimeNo.218/2024 is concerned, it is stated that the said complaint is pendingand the petitioner is on bail. So far as third case i.e. C.R. No.221/2024,it is stated that on inquiry, no arm is found. There is also one chaptercase where action under Section 107 of Cr.P.C. is taken. He, therefore,prayed that no action be taken. 5.The learned Deputy Commissioner of Police considered that threeoffences are pending against the petitioner i.e. C.R. No.61/2023 ispending before the Court and other two offences are underinvestigation. There is also one chapter case No. 76/2023. He furtherconsidered the statements of secret witnesses and the inquiry reportwherein there was an action proposed to extern the petitioner for twoyears. The learned Deputy Commissioner, therefore, passed an orderexterning the petitioner for two years from District Chh. Sambhajinagarand issued a final show cause notice calling upon him as to why noEthape ( 5 ) WP-729-2025action be taken. Petitioner appeared and submitted his say on 8thJanuary 2025. 6.The learned Deputy Commissioner of Police, vide order dated 31stJanuary 2025, passed an order externing the petitioner from Chh.Sambhajinagar for one year. The petitioner filed an appeal before thelearned Divisional Commissioner. Vide order dated 16th April 2025, thelearned Divisional Commissioner rejected the appeal. The petitioner,therefore, approached this Court. 7.Mr. Hange, the learned Advocate for the petitioner, vehementlyargued that there are only three cases pending against the petitioner.Out of three cases, only one is pending in the Court, and two cases arestill under investigation. No conviction is recorded in any of the cases.Both the authorities have thus failed to appreciate that mere pendencyof cases is not a sufficient ground to take action of externment. One ofthe cases is only under the Arms Act, where no bodily offence is madeout. He submits that the action is only due to village politics. TheEthape ( 6 ) WP-729-2025learned Deputy Commissioner of Police has accepted the reportsubmitted by the Assistant Commissioner of Police indicating lack ofpersonal satisfaction. Even the notice issued by the DeputyCommissioner of Police was flawed, and in his submission, the action istotally without any foundation. He, therefore, prays for allowing the writpetition.8.Smt. Deshmukh, the learned APP, vehemently opposed thepetition. She submits that there are three offences pending against thepetitioner. Now, the charge-sheets have been filed in the cases which areshown to be under investigation. The first crime was registered in theyear 2023, for offences under Sections 326, 141, 143, 147, 149, 2021 ofthe IPC. She argued that the action of externment is a preventive action,wherein the conduct of a person needs to be seen. The action is taken onthe report submitted by the responsible police officer. There are twooffences registered in the year 2024 i.e., one offence registered on 18thAugust 2024, and immediately within a week’s time, another offencecame to be registered. It is shown that the petitioner is actively involvedEthape ( 7 ) WP-729-2025in criminal activities. She further submits that the petitioner is foundwith dangerous weapon, which creates terror in the minds of people.From the papers available with her, she submits that the petitionermoved around with a dangerous weapons. There are secret statementsrecorded of two persons. From those statements it is clearly seen that thepetitioner is involved in the activities of fighting and ransom, etc. Heeven prepared reels, creating terror in the minds of people. He had takenan amount of Rs.500/- from one of the persons, who gave a secretstatement, by showing a fighter. Another secret statement maker alsomentions that an amount of Rs.900/- was taken from him by showing aknife. She thus submits that a case is made out to take action ofexternment. She prays for rejection of the writ petition. 9.After hearing the parties and going through the petition and thepapers produced by the learned APP, it is clear that the material availablewith the authorities consists of the record of three cases pending againstthe petitioner. Two of these cases are still under investigation. Nowcharge-sheet is filed as per learned APP and one case is pending beforeEthape ( 8 ) WP-729-2025the Court, but the same has not yet concluded. There is also one chaptercase where action under Section 107 of Cr.P.C. has been taken. Theoffence in C.R. No.61/2023 under Section 326 of IPC though is a seriousoffence, no conviction has been recorded yet. In C.R. No.218/2024, theallegation is of abetment to commit suicide, however, the complaint wasfiled based on suspicion that it is the petitioner who has abetted asuicide. However, the said offence is still under investigation. C.R.No.221/2024 is under Arms Act. It was filed on the basis of some reelscirculated on a whats-app group where he is shown standing in front ofa car with a rifle and a sword. 10.This Court finds that certainly, this much material cannot be saidto be sufficient enough to take action of externment. The offences arepending only at one police station i.e. Harsool Police Station and still theaction is taken for the entire district. 11.The learned Advocate for the Petitioner has relied upon thejudgment in the case of Sujit Punamchand Kahate/Rajput Vs. TheEthape ( 9 ) WP-729-2025Divisional Commissioner and Ors. passed in Criminal Writ Petition No.198 of 2025 dated 10th July 2025 (Aurangabad Bench). This Court, inthe said case, by considering the earlier judgment, had set aside theorder of externment. 12.Learned APP relied upon the judgment in the case of Akash @Guddya Dnyaneshwar Jadhav and Anr. Vs. The State of Maharashtra andOrs. passed in Criminal Writ Petition No.504 of 2025 dated 23rd June2025 (Aurangabad Bench). In the said case, this Court had modified theorder of externment by restricting it only to the extent of one Talukawhere the offences were registered against the petitioner therein. 13.Considering the overall material, this Court finds that this materialis not sufficient to take action to extern the petitioner from entire districtfor one year. This Court is, therefore, inclined to allow the writ petition.Hence, the following order: ORDER(i)Criminal Writ Petition stands allowed in terms of prayer clause (B)which reads as under:Ethape ( 10 ) WP-729-2025“To quash and set aside the order dated 31.01.2025passed by Dy. Commissioner of Police ChhatrapatiSambhajinagar Zone No.2, of Externing petitioner fromthe area of Police Commissionerate ChhatrapatiSambhajinagar and District for one year and order dated16.04.2025 passed by Divisional CommissionerChhatrapati Sambhajinagar confirming the said order ofexternment for one year.” (ii)With this, criminal writ petition stands disposed off.[KISHORE C. SANT, J.]Ethape