Karnataka High Court
Juber @ Jabeer S/O Khaleelsab vs The State Of Karnataka on 15 February, 2018
:1:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2018
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE N.K.SUDHINDRARAO
CRL. R.P. NO. 100005/2018
BETWEEN:
JUBER @ JABEER S/O KHALEELSAB @
KHALLESAB, AGE: 40, OCC.: BUSINESS,
R/O: LINGARAJ CAMP, GANGAVATI,
TQ: GANGAVATI, DIST: KOPPAL.
- PETITIONER
(BY SRI ANAND R. KOLLI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
REP. BY ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER
AND SUB DIVISIONAL MAGISTRATE,
KOPPAL, REP. BY SPP,
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
DHARWAD BENCH.
- RESPONDENT
(BY SRI PRAVEEN K UPPAR, GOVT. PLEADER)
THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION IS FILED U/S
397 R/W SEC. 401 OF CR.P.C. SEEKING TO SET ASIDE
THE ORDER OF EXTERNMENT DATED 31.12.2017 PASSED
BY THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER AND SUB DIVISIONAL
MAGISTRATE, KOPPAL, IN SUB/KUM/M.A.G./27/2017-18
& ETC.
THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION COMING UP
FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE
FOLLOWING:
:2:
ORDER
This Criminal Revision Petition is filed u/s 397r/w Sec. 401 of Cr.P.C. wherein the petitioner seeks set aside of the externment order dated 31.12.2017 wherein the petitioner was ordered to exterminated from 30.12.2017 for a period of one year, on the ground of innocence and the order is malicious and vindictive.
2. Basically information was filed with a report by the Deputy Superintendent of Police to the Assistant Commissioner who is the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Koppal. It is stated that the petitioner is involved in commission of offence and several criminal cases were registered and a reference is made with reference to the resident of Ward No.9, Lingaraj Camp, Gangavati, by name Jubair @ Jabir @ Jabeer son of Khaleelsab @ Khallesab, along with his men has attempted to murder, planting enmity among the communities and has become a fearsome factor to the Society. The list of criminal cases registered against him is as under: :3:
Sl. No. Crime No. Offences
1. 118/2007 143, 147, 148, 296, 504, 506 r/w 149 IPC.
2. 113/2008 107 OF Cr.P.C.
3. 139/2009 323, 504, 506 r/w Sec. 34 of IPC
4. 219/2009 143, 147, 148, 323, 504, 506 r/w 149 IPC
5. 67/2010 143, 147, 148, 323, 324, 354, 307, 506 r/w 149 IPC
6. 68/2010 143, 147, 148, 323, 326, 504, 506, 392 r/w 149 IPC & Sec. 3(01)(10) of SC/ST Act.
7. 192/2011 143, 147, 148, 323, 324, 355, 504, 506 r/w 149 IPC & Sec. 3(01)(1) of SC/ST Act.
8. 36/2012 143, 147, 148, 153(a), 324, 504, 355, 332 R/W Sec. 149 of IPC.
9. 143/2012 107 of Cr.P.C.
10. 43/2013 107 of Cr.P.C.
11. 68/2013 110(A) & (J) of Cr.P.C.
12. 159/2013 143, 147, 148, 323, 324, 307, 504 r/w Sec.
149 of IPC & 3(01)(10) of SC/ST Act.
13. 161/2013 Sec. 107 of Cr.P.C.
14. 76/2014 Sec. 110(A) & (J) of Cr.P.C.
15. 204/2014 Sec. 110(A) & (J) of Cr.P.C.
16. 104/2015 Sec. 110(A) & (J) of Cr.P.C.
17. 211/2015 Sec. 107 of Cr.P.C.
18. 243/2015 143, 147, 504, 323, 324, 504, 506 r/w Sec.
149 of IPC
19. 132/2016 Sec. 107, 151 of Cr.P.C.
20. 180/2016 Sec. 107 of Cr.P.C. :4:
21. 143, 147, 148, 323, 448, 354, 504, 506 r/w Sec. 149 of IPC & 3(01)(10) of SC/ST Act.
22. 236/2016 143, 147, 505 (1)(b)(c) r/w Sec. 149 of IPC
23. 278/2016 143, 147, 148, 323, 448, 354, 504, 506 r/w Sec. 149 of IPC
24. 279/2016 143, 147, 148, 341, 324, 323, 324, 504, 506 R/W Sec. 149 of IPC
25. 149/2017 Sec. 107 of Cr.P.C.
3. On 19.05.2014 a communal goonda sheet is opened against the petitioner. During 2016 festival of Lord Ganesh when the deity was taken in procession for immersion into water, the petitioner is alleged to have thrown chappal and stone over the procession. During 2016 during Id-Milad and Lord Hanuma Mala Sankeertan procession was organized at Gundamma Camp, Gangavati when one Laxmi objected for rising flag of other community and when she directed not to install such flag, the petitioner and his associates attacked her. In this case a criminal case came to be registered in Crime No. 278/2016 for the offences punishable u/S 143, 147, 148, 323, 448, 354, 504, 506 :5: r/w Sec. 149 of IPC. Because of this incident there was breach of peace and law & order in the town. The petitioner is said to have attacked on backward class people and has become a threat to the society.
4. The petitioner is acquitted in some of the criminal cases and the remaining cases are still under trial. Despite of opportunities given he has failed to live without committing offences. The activities of the petitioner and his associates have come as an obstruction to the development of the society. When the bail was granted it was ordered to be released in the procession from the jail but he has resumed to anti social activities. The offences relating to communal violations, threatening fearsome atmosphere to prove the case registered against him, other illegal activities and manhandling several persons and destroying peace of the fellowmen. The petitioner is also said to be a member of Popular Front of India.
:6:
5. It was brought to the notice of the Court that show cause notice was issued to the petitioner on 14.07.2017. Despite it is submitted that he has not mend his ways. In the meanwhile a copy of the order passed by this Court in Crl. R.P. No. 1433/2015 dated 04.02.2016 wherein similar impugned order was set aside. However, it is made clear in the said order that the petitioner will have to strictly comply with the undertaking given in terms of Sec. 110 of Cr.P.C.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that this Court in W.P. No. 100251/2018 has ordered stay of the proceedings.
7. On the other hand, learned Govt. Pleader would submit that, the petitioner is involved in anti social activities causing communal harmony. He is involved in many criminal cases. The impugned order is justified and does not suffer from infirmity much less illegality. Hence, sought to dismiss the petition.
:7:
8. Right of living peacefully and to exercise freedom and enjoying is a fundamental right of others also has to be considered. At the same time no one is having any right to find his peace in the misery or sorrow of the others, annoying, insulting, injuring the person or sentiment of others.
9. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, in several cases the Courts while granting bail have imposed condition that he should appear before the Investigating Officer whenever directed to do so.
10. It is made clear that in case any conflict of exterment and the condition not to move out of the particular place, the order of extermination shall prevail and the extermination order is confirmed. However, alternative arrangement may be issued to the petitioner for his presence before the nearest Police Station for marking his presence. Thus, while complying the order of extermination the respective judge who has imposed :8: such condition regarding the presence may relax the condition and permit the petitioner to move.
11. In the circumstances, on perusing the records and upon hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Govt. Pleader and glancing over the allegations, incidents, legal proceedings claimed by the Police, criminal cases registered against the petitioner, I am of the considered view that the impugned order passed by the Assistant Commissioner exterminating the petitioner does not suffer from infirmity, illegality or against principles of natural justice and the same is confirmed.
Sd/-
JUDGE bvv