This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed for quashing and setting aside the order dated 27-3-2012 passed by the respondent No.1 in Appeal No.353 of 2011 modifying the order 25-11-2011 passed by the respondent No.2 externing the petitioner for a period of six months.
The facts in short are that a notice dated 18-7-2011 was issued by the Deputy Police Commissioner, Ahmedabad City, to the petitioner to show cause as to why he may not be externed for a term of two years from Ahmedabad City, Ahmedabad Rural, Gandhinagar, Kheda and Mehsana, for the reasons mentioned therein. The filed reply denying the allegations. Thereafter, order of externment was passed on 25-11-2011 by the respondent No.2 externing the petitioner for one year. However, in Appeal No.353 of 2011 preferred before the respondent No.1-Deputy Secretary, Home Departament, order was modified and period was reduced from one year to six months. Hence, the present petition.
Heard learned advocate for the petitioner, Mr.H.R.Prajapati and learned APP, Mr.L.B.Dabhi for the respondent No.1-State.
Learned advocate for the petitioner has raised so many contentions in his petition. However, at the time of arguments, he has restricted his arguments on the period of externment. It is submitted by learned advocate for the petitioner that the petitioner has been convicted for the offence punishable under the Indian Penal Code and also under the Bombay Prohibition Act. It is further submitted that son of the petitioner is in the 12th Standard and his results are expected shortly. It is also submitted that health of wife of the petitioner was not good and hence, his presence is very much necessary. It is further submitted that since the order externing the petitioner, no untoward incident was reported. It is ultimately requested that the period of externment may be reduced from six months to four months.
It is to be noted that the learned advocate for the petitioner has restricted his arguments only on the point of period of externment. Hence, I would not like to reproduce or discuss the entire evidence which are on record as the same remained unchallenged. Considering the aforesaid peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the opinion that interest of justice will be met if the period of externment imposed on the petitioner is reduced from six months to four months.
In view of the above, the petition is partly allowed. Order dated 25-11-2011 passed by the respondent No.2 as also the order dated 27-3-2012 passed by the respondent No.1 in Appeal No.353 of 2011 modifying the order passed by the respondent No.1 are hereby modified and the period of externment is reduced from six months to four months. Rest of the order passed by the authorities would remain unaltered. Direct service is permitted.
(M.D.SHAH,J.) radhan Top