1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 1701 OF 2010 Rakesh Vilas Thakur .... Petitioner. V/s The State of Maharashtra and others .... Respondents. Mr. R.D. Suryawanshi for the petitioner Mr. S.A. Shaikh, APP for the State. CORAM: V. M. KANADE, J. DATE : 28TH JUNE, 2010 P.C.:- 1. Heard the learned Counsel for the Petitioner and the leaned APP for the State. 2. Petitioner is challenging the order of externment dated 4/12/2009. By the said order, Petitioner has been externed from five Districts. It is submitted that the externment authority has externed the Petitioner from five Districts, though prejudicial activities are confined to Nerul area in New Bombay. It is, therefore, submitted that the said order is excessive since it has been passed on extraneous considerations and no opportunity was given to the Petitioner to make representation in respect of other Districts from which he is externed. 2 3. The Apex Court as well as this Court in catena of cases held that it is not permissible for externment authority to extern the Petitioner from the area where no prejudicial activity has been alleged against him in the show cause notice. In the present case, show cause notice refers to illegal activities of the Petitioner in Nerual area and yet the order of externment externing him from five Districts has been passed. The said order, therefore, is clearly excessive inasmuch as it has been issued without any application of mind and, secondly, without giving any opportunity to the Petitioner to make representation in respect of other four Districts where he has allegedly committed illegal activities. Since this Court does not have power to correct the order of externment while exercising its writ jurisdiction, there is no alternative but to quash the entire order of externment. 4. Hence, Writ Petition is allowed in terms of prayer clause (b). (V.M. KANADE, J.) 3