Madhya Pradesh High Court
Gyan Singh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 7 January, 2020
Author: Chief Justice
Bench: Chief Justice
1 WA-1507-2019
The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
WA-1507-2019
(GYAN SINGH Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS)
6
Jabalpur, Dated : 07-01-2020
Per: V.K.Shukla, J.
Shri Kabeer Paul, Advocate for the appellant.
Shri H.K.Upadhyay, Government Advocate for the respondents/State. The present intra court appeal is filed under Section 2(1) of Madhya Pradesh Uchcha Nyayalaya (Khand Nyayapeeth Ko Appeal) Adhiniyam, 2005, being aggrieved by the order dated 20-08-2019, passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.No.511/2019, whereby the order of externment dated 14-11-2018 and the order passed by the Appellate Authority dated 31-12- 2018 have been affirmed and the writ petition has been dismissed.
The facts in short are that on the basis of the report of the Superintendent of Police District Niwadi/Tikamgarh, the District Magistrate on 31-12-2018 in exercise of the powers conferred under Section 3(1) of the Madhya Pradesh Rajya Suraksha Adhiniyam, 1990 (hereinafter referred to as 'Adhiniyam, 1990) has passed an order of externment of the appellant from district Niwadi and its contiguous districts viz. Tikamgarh, Chhatarpur and their revenue limits for a period of one year with immediate effect and not to return to the jurisdiction of Tikamgarh and its adjacent districts. The said order was challenged in the appeal before the Commissioner, Sagar Division, Sagar, which suffered dismissal vide order dated 31-12-2018. Though the period of externment has already come to an end but the counsel for the appellant urged that the order of externment is stigmatic and would constitute a ground for future proceedings by the respondents regarding externment or any other legal action. It is further contended by him that out of 10 cases since 2004, only one case Crime No.659/17 relates to the serious offence under Sections 394, 323, 294, 506 and 34 of IPC. It is further stated that there is no material to prove that the appellant was a Digitally signed by HAR SAHAY PATERIYA Date: 03/02/2020 15:34:29 2 WA-1507-2019 hardened and habitual criminal. It is also urged that in most of the cases, he has been acquitted by the court of law.The appellant has relied on the judgment passed by the Single Bench in the case of Pappu @ Dinesh Gupta Vs. State of M.P. and others, 2007(3) MPLJ 115 and also the judgment passed in the case of Pappu @ Pramod Vs. State of M.P. 2014(2) MPLJ 621.
Per contra, learned counsel for the State supported the order of the learned Single Judge and has strenuously contended that the order passed by the District Magistrate, whereby he has taken note of the fact that the appellant had threatened one of the witness of the present case namely Ramla Ahirwar, who lodged a report against the appellant on 17-09-2018 at Police Station Prathvipur is just and proper. On his complaint, Crime No.369/2018 was registered for the offence punishable under Sections 341, 294, 323 and 506 of IPC and under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.
Taking into consideration the aforesaid fact that even after the registration of the externment proceedings, it has been alleged that the appellant has threatened one of the witness of the externment proceedings namely Ramla Ahirwar and on his complaint, Crime no. 369/18 has been registered, we do not find any illegality in the order of externment taking into consideration the conduct of the appellant and the fact that against the appellant, many times preventive action has been taken by the respondents. The judgment pressed into service by the counsel for the appellant would not render any assistance to the facts of the present case, the same being based on factual matrix involved therein. In the present case there is positive material against the appellant of extending threats to the witness of the externment proceedings and at his instance, a criminal case is registered against him. Even otherwise the period of externment is over, we do not find any case warranting interference in the intra court appeal. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.
Digitally signed by HAR SAHAY PATERIYA Date: 03/02/2020 15:34:29 3 WA-1507-2019 (AJAY KUMAR MITTAL) (VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA) CHIEF JUSTICE JUDGE hsp Digitally signed by HAR SAHAY PATERIYA Date: 03/02/2020 15:34:29