The Bombay High Court has quashed the externment order (order sending a person outside the city limits) issued against one Akbar Khan (32) as the police forgot to send him a prior notice regarding this. The court was hearing a petition filed by Worli resident Khan, seeking to quash the externment order stating that the police had not issued a notice to him before passing the order on November 26, 2020.
A division bench of Justices S S Shinde and N J Jamadar quashed the externment order issued against Khan stating, “We find considerable force in the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the right of the petitioner to reply or make effective representation to answer such a notice to the competent authority has been totally hampered and jeopardized.”
As per the procedure, a notice is issued to the concerned person and given a chance to explain why he should not be permitted to reside in the city for a specific period of time. An order of externment is then passed by the concerned DCP. In Khan’s case, the DCP had passed an order on November 26, externing him for one year on the ground that he was a habitual offender and was booked for extortion, theft and cause harm to the assets of the public.
Khan had filed an appeal before the divisional commissioner who rejected it on March 23. Harshal Mirashi, Khan’s advocate, argued that as he did not receive any notice, he was not aware about the general allegations. Hence, he was deprived of his right to make effective representation. Besides, Khan has not been convicted in any case till date. “We have carefully perused the record and material pertaining to the externment proceedings initiated against the petitioner, and it appears that the said notice dated 12th August, 2020 signed by the concerned Assistant Commissioner of Police has not been sent to the petitioner (Khan),” the judges observed.
The judges noted that was an infringement of Khan’s fundamental right to reside in a place of his choice. The court quashed the order stating, “We are of the opinion that because of externing the petitioner from Mumbai city and suburbs by the impugned orders, the fundamental right of the petitioner to reside at the place of his choice or move from one place to another has been curtailed and taken away for the period mentioned in the impugned orders.”
