Rahul Suresh Khetre v. The Divisional Commissioner / Appellate Authority, Pune Division And ORS
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.1714 OF 2017 WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.1715 OF 2017 WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.1716 OF 2017 WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.1717 OF 2017 Suryakant @ Bandu Ranoji Aandekar
...Petitioner
Versus
The Divisional Commissioner /Appellate Authority, Pune Division, Pune & Ors.
...Respondents
.....
Mr. Ganesh Bhujbal for the Petitioners.
Mrs. A.S. Pai, APP in WP/1714/2017.
Mr. J.P. Yagnik, APP in WP/1715/2017 to WP/1717/2017. CORAM : RANJIT MORE & SMT. ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, JJ.
DATED: 3rd MAY, 2017.
P.C.:- Heard the learned counsel for the Petitioners and the learned APP for the Respondent -State.
2.
By the common order dated 30th January, 2017 the Deputy Commissioner of Police, Zone-2, Pune City, the Petitioners were externed for a period of one year from the jurisdiction of Pune City and 1/3
Pune Commissionerate Area under section 55 of the Maharashtra Police Act. This order is confirmed by the Appellate Authority viz. the Divisional Commissioner, Pune Division, Pune and therefore, the Petitioners are before this Court.
3.
We have perused the impugned orders. We have also perused the provisions of section 55 of the Maharashtra Police Act. The Petitioner in Writ Petition No.1714 of 2017 is the leader of the gang of which other Petitioners in other Writ Petitions are the members. There are several serious cases registered against them, individually as also as members of the gang. The Externment Authority also relied upon in-camera statements and rightly came to the conclusion. The Petitioners were given opportunity of hearing and thereafter said order was passed.
4.
We agree with the Externment Authority and the Appellate Authority that the movement or encampment of the above Petitioners, who are leaders/members of the gang is causing danger, alarm or reasonable suspicion that unlawful designs are entertained by these persons. We also find that the order was necessary to prevent violence. We are, therefore, not inclined to entertain these Petitions. 2/3
5.
The Petitions are accordingly dismissed.
(ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, J.) (RANJIT MORE, J.) 3/3