1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.1184 OF 2009 Shiva @ Subramanyam Ganesh Nadar ...Petitioner vs. The Assistant Police Commissioner, Ulhasnagar Division and another ...Respondents Mr.Sachin Pawar for the petitioner Mr.H.J.Dedhia,A.P.P for the respondents CORAM :A.S.OKA,J. DATE : JUNE 26, 2009 P.C. 1 By this writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India the petitioner has challenged the order of externment passed against him under section 56(1) (A)(B) of the Bombay Police Act,1951 (hereinafter referred to as the said Act). The Deputy Commissioner of Police passed an order on 23rd February 2009 by which the petitioner was ordered to be externed for a period of two years from the Districts of Thane, Mumbai and Mumbai Suburban. In an appeal preferred against the said order, the Appellate Authority modified the said order and directed that the petitioner shall be externed from the area falling within the jurisdiction commissionerate of Police at Thane for a period of six months. 2 A show cause notice was given to the petitioner setting out the prejudicial activities carried out by the 2 petitioner and his associates. Reliance has been placed on the three offences registered against the petitioner at Vithalwadi in District Thane. Reliance is placed on the incamera statements of two witnesses. The offences referred to above have been registered in the year 2007-2008. In camera statements have been recorded on 8th December 2008. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the externing authority as well as the appellate authority committed a serious error by ignoring that the offences allegedly registered against the petitioner were not of serious nature and in fact the petitioner was falsely implicated. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the allegations made by the persons whose in camera statements were recorded relate to isolated instances relating to individuals. He placed reliance on the decision of the Division Bench of this court in Case Ram Pati Vs. State of Maharashtra and others [1987 (1) Bombay Cases Reporter page 471.] . The learned A.P.P supported the impugned order. 3 In the show cause notice issued to the petitioner, reliance has been placed on the first information reports in which it is alleged that the petitioner has committed offences punishable under Chapter XVI and XVII of the Indian Penal Code. The witnesses whose in camera statements have been recorded have stated that the petitioner has no regular means of livelihood. They have 3 stated that the petitioner along with his associates move about in the Maratha section area falling within the jurisdiction of Vithalwadi police station and at Ulhasnagar. It is stated that they are indulging in extortion. It is alleged that they have been extorting amounts and valuables from the common people by threatening them by showing the weapons. Both the witnesses have stated that by threatening them by knife, the petitioner extorted the amounts from them. 4 After considering the material on record, the externing authority has recorded subjective satisfaction and has passed an order of externment. In appeal the substantial relief has been granted to the petitioner by confining the area to the area falling within the jurisdiction of Commissionerate of Police, Thane and by reducing the period to six months. Principles of natural justice has been complied with. 5 In the circumstances, it is not possible to interfere with the subjective satisfaction recorded by the authorities. Writ Petition is accordingly rejected. JUDGE