1 prod-wp-942-11.sxw IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY srj CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 942 OF 2011 Mr. Afaq S. Khan .. Petitioner. V/s. The State of Maharashtra & Others .. Respondents. Mr. A.H.H.Ponda i/b. Mr. Sudhir Halli & Mr. B.V.Patole, for the Petitioner. Mr. Y.M.Nakhwa, for Respondent-State. CORAM : A.R.JOSHI, J. DATE : 1st APRIL, 2011. P.C.: Not on board. Upon mentioning, taken on board. 1 Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. 2 Heard rival submission for sometime on this Writ Petition. Externment Order was passed against present Petitioner vide order dated 28 th March, 2011 and served on the externee on 29 th March, 2011. By the said order, present Petitioner was externed from Brihanmumbai and Brihanmumbai Suburban Districts for the period of three months from the service of the order on him. An Externment Appeal preferred before competent authority was filed on 30 th March, 2 prod-wp-942-11.sxw 2011, bearing no.69 of 2011. Admittedly, said appeal is still pending for the orders and in fact, the stay application preferred in the said appeal is also still pending. 3 During arguments, learned counsel for the Petitioner places heavy reliance on the following authorities:- (i) 1988(1) Bom.C.R. 131 – Shamkumar A. Dalvi v/s. The State of Maharashtra & Another. In the said matter, the Hon'ble Division Bench has expressed that when an appeal was provided by the State and the same is filed, it is then, in a matter of externment, but just and fair that pending the appeal, the externment is stayed. Refusal in that behalf may, in a given case as well render the appeal itself infructuous, if it is said that stay is not granted as a matter of policy, it is rather unfortunate. The grievances made before this Court is that hearing is not given to the Petitioner in the said application and the same is pending for hearing and orders. It is prayed that in the extra ordinary jurisdiction of this Court, the stay of the externment order may be granted in consonance with the observation of the above cited decision. 4 Still considering the citations and considering the arguments, at this juncture, it would not be in the fitness of the situation to override the decision of the appellate authority when the 3 prod-wp-942-11.sxw stay application is still pending and will be heard and decided. However, directions are given to the appellate authority to expedite hearing within the time bound period . Hence, the following order:- ORDER (a) Appellate Authority shall hear the application preferred by the present Petitioner for Stay of the Externment Order during pendency of the Externment Appeal No.69 of 2011, as expeditiously as possible and within five days from today and more particularly in view of the observation mentioned in the said citation. (b) With the above directions, Writ Petition is disposed of. (A.R.JOSHI, J.)