FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.936 OF 2010 (Ganesh s/o Baliram Kachave Vs. The State of Maharashtra & ors.) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office notes, office Memoranda of Court’s or Coram,appearances, Court’s orders Judge’s or directions and Registrar’s orders Orders Shri M.P. Kale, Advocate for the petitioner Shri V.H. Dighe, A.P.P. for respondents ... CORAM: K.U. CHANDIWAL, J. DATED: 28th January, 2011 1. Heard. Since the externment order issued by the Sub- Divisional Officer, dated 23.8.2010 is questioned, the petitioner has the appellate remedy before the appellate authority – State, the petitioner to exhaust the same. 2. The learned counsel seeks to place reliance to the judgment of this Court, recorded in the matter of Babadin s/o Badruddin Vs. State of Maharashtra [2001(1) Mh.L.J. 502], and particularly para 7 thereof. The learned Single Judge has said, only because the petitioner did not file an appeal, justice should not be denied to him as prima facie the impugned order was not tenable. At this stage, this Court need not to ponder upon merits of the order of the learned Sub-Divisional Officer as primarily it was supported by the documents served with show-cause-notice to the accused/ petitioner. Writ Petition dismissed. The accused/ petitioner to exhaust appellate remedy in terms of Section 60 of the Bombay Police Act (22 of 1951). Liberty thereafter. (K.U. CHANDIWAL) JUDGE fmp/cwp936.10