08 Jun 2121

There should be reasonable nexus between offenses alleged and the externment order and the authority shall assign the reasons for externment - Bombay High Court

Case : Ranjit Kumar Veeran of Mumbai v. Deputy Commissioner of Police and State of Maharashtra Criminal Writ Petition No. 356 of 2021

Court : Bombay High Court

Bench : Justice S. S. Shinde and Justice Manish Pitale

Decided on : 08 Jun 2121

Relevant Statutes

Section 307 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 

Brief Facts and Procedural History

1. The petitioner was the witness in the case where his business partner was murdered by the group of one Dorai within the vicinity of Aarey Milk Colony, Goregaon (Mumbai). The Petitioner addressed a letter to Senior Police Inspector for the protection of himself and his family due to the murder. Between 19.10.2017 and 8.07.2019, the petitioner was arraigned as accused but the Array Police Station and its officers were aware of the fact that the petitioner was not present at the spot of the incident and further the petitioner name was added in the case. 

2. On 16.10.2018, the petitioner and his brother were assaulted and hospitalized for several injuries and the case was registered against Dorai at the instance of the petitioner under Section 307 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 and on the other hand, a cross-complaint was registered against the Petitioner by Aarey Police Station. On 8.07.2019, A cross-complaint was registered against the petitioner and his associates. 

3. On 4.10.2019, Petitioner was granted bail but he was externed from Mumbai City for two years on 14.07.2020. Afterwards, the Petitioner filed a writ petition for quashing the above order but the court directed the petitioner to approach before the appellate authority. But the Appellate Authority confirmed the order of externment on 12.10.2020.

The Issue of the Case

Whether the order of Externment passed by Appellate Authority is valid?

The Observation of the Court

1. The Honourable Bombay High Court observed that there is no nexus between the offences and the externment proceedings. Also, The Honourable High Court observed that as per the order passed, there was no elaborate discussion that the witnesses who were coming to depose against the petitioner due to any fear to their person or property.

2. The Honourable High Court held that if any authority has externed any person from the adjoining districts, then they have to give reasons why the externment order has been warranted for the offences which are registered in Police Station in Aarey Colony. But in the order passed there was no such discussion provided. 

3. The Honourable Bombay High Court also observed that the externment order was passed on 14.07.2020 and statements were recorded on 7.1.2020 and 9.1.2020. There was no live link between the prejudicial activities and the order of externment. In the Impugned order, there is no specific discussion that the witnesses are not coming to give evidence in public due to fear and alleged activities of the petitioner.

The Decision Held by the Court

Writ Petition is disposed of and the order dated 12.10.2020 and confirming the externment order dated 14.07.2020 which was passed by the Respondent No.1 is quashed and set aside.

Click here to view/download the judgement >