Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 9 of 9 (0.26 seconds)Section 58 in The Karnataka Police Act, 1963. [Entire Act]
Section 54 in The Karnataka Police Act, 1963. [Entire Act]
Section 60 in The Karnataka Police Act, 1963. [Entire Act]
Section 59 in The Karnataka Police Act, 1963. [Entire Act]
Section 397 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
The Karnataka Police Act, 1963.
Section 55 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
Prem Chand Somchand Shah And Anr.Etc. ... vs Union Of India And Anr on 5 February, 1991
no basis for the same. As pointed out by their Lordships of
the Supreme Court in the case of Prem Chand v. Union of
India, mere apprehension of the police is not enough for
passing an order of externment. Some ground or the other is
not adequate for making the order of externment. There must
be a clear and present danger based upon credible material
which makes the movement and acts of the person in
question alarming or dangerous or fraught with violence.
Likewise, there must be sufficient reason to believe that the
person proceeded against is so desperate and dangerous
that his mere presence in the locality or any part thereof is
hazardous to the community and its safety. A stringent test
must be applied in order to avoid easy possibility of abuse of
this power to the detriment of the fundamental freedoms.
Natural justice must be fairly complied with and vague
allegations and secret hearings are gross violations of Arts.
14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution. The Act permits
externment, provided the action is bona fide. All power,
including police power, must be informed by fairness if it is to
survive judicial scrutiny. It would appear, the learned S.D.M.
has been more influenced by the secret report sent by the
Circle Inspector of Police about such apprehension and the
secret visit to the place, which has not been put to the
petitioners. In substance, the S.D.M. has failed to form an
opinion on tangible material that witnesses were not willing
to come forward to give evidence in public against the
petitioners. The latter part of the requirement of Clause (b)
of S. 55 having not been fulfilled, the impugned order of
externment passed cannot be sustained."
1