1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.1146 OF 2010 Tausif Iliyas Qureshi @ Samajdar ...Petitioner Vs. A.S. Deshbrathar and Ors. ...Respondents ----- Mr.Mubin Solkar for Petitioner Mr.P.P. Bhosale - APP for State ----- CORAM: V.M. KANADE J. DATED: 16TH APRIL, 2010 P.C. 1. The Petitioner is challenging the order of externment dated 29.11.2009 passed by the Respondent No.1 externing the Petitioner for a period of two years, which order has been confirmed by the Respondent No.3 in appeal by order dated 30.3.2010. 2. The learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner, inter alia, submitted that the order of externment is an excessive order inasmuch as the Petitioner has been externed from five districts, though the show cause notice makes a reference to the prejudicial activity of the Petitioner in Rabodi Police Station, dist. Thane. 1 3. I have perused the show cause notice and impugned order of externment. In my view, the Externing Authority has committed an error of law which is apparent on the face of record. By the order, though the prejudicial activities of the Petitioner are restricted to Rabodi Police Station, Dist. Thane and he has been externed from five districts, no material is shown in the show cause notice regarding any prejudicial activity by the Petitioner in the other four districts. 4. That being the position, there is clear non- application of mind on the part of the Externing Authority in externing the Petitioner in other four districts. The order, therefore, is excessive and is beyond the scope of the show cause notice issued by the Respondents. The said order, therefore, is liable to be quashed on this ground alone. The Apex Court and this Court in catena of cases have held that the order of externment should not be passed on extraneous consideration. The said order clearly reveals non-application of mind. Apart from being excessive, the order clearly violated the fundamental rights guaranteed under the Article 19 of the Constitution of India. In my view, since it is not possible for this Court to correct the said order of the Externing Authority, the entire order is, 1 therefore, quashed and set aside. Petition is allowed in terms of prayer clause (b) and disposed of . 5. Parties to act on the authenticated copy. (V.M. KANADE J.)