Karnataka High Court
Irfaan Alias Irfan S/O Maqbool Havaldar vs The State Of Karnataka on 24 September, 2024
Author: H.P.Sandesh
Bench: H.P.Sandesh
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:13680
WP No. 105611 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH
WRIT PETITION NO. 105611 OF 2024 (GM-POLICE)
BETWEEN:
IRFAAN @ IRFAN S/O. MAQBOOL HAVALDAR,
AGE: 37 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS,
R/O. H.NO. EWS-A/9, KHB COLONY,
NANDISHWAR NAGAR, NAVANAGAR,
HUBBALLI-580025, TQ: HUBBALLI,
DIST: DHARWAD.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. SHRIHARSH A. NEELOPANT, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF HOME,
VIDHAN SOUDHA, BENGALURU-560001.
Digitally signed
by SAROJA 2. THE ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY,
HANGARAKI
SAROJA
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
AND APPELLATE AUTHORITY CONSTITUTED
HANGARAKI KARNATAKA
DHARWAD
BENCH
UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF ARMS ACT 1959,
Date: 2024.10.07
13:29:02 +0530 DEPARTMENT OF HOME ROOM NO.222,
II FLOOR, VIDHANA SOUDHA,
BENGALURU-560001.
3. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF POLICE,
(LAW AND ORDER) AND SPECIAL
EXECUTIVE MAGISTRATE,
HUBBALLI-DHARWAD, NAVANAGAR,
HUBBALLI-580025, TQ: HUBBALLI,
DIST: DHARWAD.
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:13680
WP No. 105611 of 2024
4. THE POLICE INSPECTOR,
VIDYA NAGAR POLICE STATION,
VIDYA NAGAR, HUBBALLI-580021,
TQ: HUBBALLI, DIST: DHARWAD.
5. THE POLICE INSPECTOR,
APMC POLICE STATION,
NAVANAGAR, HUBBALLI-580025,
TQ: HUBBALLI, DIST: DHARWAD.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. PRAVEEN K. UPPAR, AGA FOR R1-R5)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227
OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OR
ORDER OR DIRECTION IN THE NATURE OF WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO
QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 09.08.2024, PASSED IN CASE
BEARING NO.H.D.180 SST 2024 PASSED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT
AS PER ANNEXURE-A AND ALSO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER
DATED 10.04.2024 PASSED IN NO.CHP/VIKADA/COP/HU-
DHA/GADIPARU/10/2024 BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT WHEREBY AN
ORDER OF EXTERNMENT IS PASSED AGAINST THE PETITIONER
UNDER SECTION 55 OF THE KARNATAKA POLICE ACT, 1963 AS
AGAINST THE PETITIONER, AS PER ANNEXURE-B IN THE INTEREST
OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING
THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
-3-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:13680
WP No. 105611 of 2024
ORAL ORDER
(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH) The learned AGA is directed to take notice for respondent Nos.1 to 5.
2. Heard the petitioner's counsel and also the counsel appearing for the respondents.
3. The prayer is sought before this Court to issue a writ or order or direction in the nature of writ of certiorari to quash the impugned order dated 09.08.2024 passed in case bearing No.HD 180 SST 2024 passed by the respondent No.2 as per Annexure-A and also quash the impugned order dated order 10.04.2024 as per Annexure-B passed by the respondent No.3 and grant such other relief.
4. The learned counsel appearing to the petitioner would submit that this petitioner is externed from 20.04.2024 to 19.10.2024. The counsel also submits that this petitioner earlier approached this Court by filing Writ Petition No.102369/2024 as per Annexure-G and the same is allowed vide order dated 18.04.2024 giving liberty to the petitioner to approach the Appellate Authority and also made it clear that if appeal is filed within ten days, orders are not given effect to till -4- NC: 2024:KHC-D:13680 WP No. 105611 of 2024 disposal of the appeal, but subject to condition that the petitioner shall report to his presence respondent No.3 once in every week. In terms of the order passed by this Court, an appeal is filed before the respondent No.2 as per Annexure-A and the respondent No.2 confirmed the order of the respondent No.3 vide order dated 09.08.2024. Being aggrieved by the order, present petition is filed before this Court.
5. The main contention of the counsel appearing before this Court is that the Hon'ble Apex Court in the judgment in 2022 SCC Online SC 99 held that a fundamental right of petitioner could not be taken away in guise of order of externment and an order of externment cannot be passed without giving reasonable opportunity of being heard by the petitioner. The counsel also would submit that for externing the petitioner the reason is assigned that there are three cases against him and other two cases registered under the Karnataka Police Act and counsel would submit that three cases invoking the IPC offences and the petitioner has been acquitted and in respect of other two cases registered under the KP Act, he has paid the fine amount and no ground of satisfactory reasons are assigned for invoking externment. -5-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:13680 WP No. 105611 of 2024
6. The counsel also would submit that in view of enjoying the benefit of interim order passed by this court almost the externment period is over remains is only 25 days. The counsel also would submit that already he had exhausted the remedy and hence, it requires interference.
7. Per contra, the counsel appearing for the State i.e., learned AGA would submit the that the order of externment is passed considering the material against him since, he had involved in criminal cases and also contend that even Appellate Authority also having considered the material on record, confirmed the said order and no grounds are made out to interfere with the order of both externment order and Appellate Authority order.
8. Having heard the petitioner's counsel and also the counsel appearing for the respondents and also taking into note of material on record and no doubt the order has been passed invoking Section 55 of the Karnataka Police Act as per Annexure-B wherein, reasons are assigned for passing an order of externment that he had indulged in criminal case invoking offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 149, 323, 341, 504 read with Section 149 of IPC in Crime No.133/2016 and so -6- NC: 2024:KHC-D:13680 WP No. 105611 of 2024 also Crime No.5/2020 for the similar offences and other two cases are KP Act and also 171 of IPC and also 160 of IPC and so also other cases invoking Sections 323, 324, 448, 504, 506, 109 read with Section 34 of IPC. The fact that he has been acquitted for the offences invoked against him of IPC offences, is not in dispute and so also in other two cases registered against him under the K.P. Act are ended in making the payment of fine, and having taken note of the offences which have been invoked in IPC offences, particularly offences of Sections 143, 147, 148, 323, 324, 504, 506 of IPC and having taken note of the gravity of offences, and also acquitted in all the cases, I am of the opinion that the reasons assigned by the externment order and Appellate Authority order both fails to take note of the gravity of the offence, and also not a case for externment as ordered by the Authority and apart from that already period almost over and only 25 days is remaining and hence, it is appropriate to warn the petitioner not to indulge in such offences to invoke Section 55 of KP Act for externment, and hence the order impugned at Annexure-B and Annexure-A are to be quashed and while passing such an order of externment also there must be exigencies in invoking such -7- NC: 2024:KHC-D:13680 WP No. 105611 of 2024 provisions to externing the petitioner and the same also not found and the same is not warranted and hence, order impugned are quashed by allowing this writ petition with a warning on the petitioner.
9. In view of the observations made above, the writ petition is disposed off.
Sd/-
(H.P.SANDESH) JUDGE SMM CT-MCK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 38