vss IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.968 OF 2008 WRIT PETITION NO.968 OF 2008 WRIT PETITION NO.968 OF 2008 Rehmatullah Bahadur Shaikh ... Petitioner V/s. The State of Maharashtra & Ors. ... Respondents Mr.V.T. Tulpule i/b Rakesh Bhatkar for Petitioner Mr.P.A. Pol, APP, for Respondent-State CORAM: SMT.NISHITA SMT.NISHITA SMT.NISHITA MHATRE, J. MHATRE, J. MHATRE, J. DATED: MAY 2, 2008 MAY 2, 2008 MAY 2, 2008 P.C.: P.C.: P.C.: . The petition challenges the order issued on 11.4.2008 against the petitioner which according to the State is a show-cause notice issued under section 56(1)(a) & (b) of the Bombay Police Act. A bare perusal of this order does not indicate that it is a show-cause notice but in fact appears to be worded as an order where the police appear to have taken action against the petitioner. 2. Before any action can be taken against a person under section 56, the procedure laid down in section 59 of the Act must be followed which requires a hearing to be given to the person who is to be externed. The order passed is obviously a final order under section 56(1)(a) and (b) rather than a show-cause notice which is required to be given under section 59. : 2 : 3. Faced with this difficulty, Mr.Pol, learned APP, upon instructions from API Sonawane, Worli Police Station states that the "show-cause" notice dated 11.4.2008 which is annexed Exhibit P will be withdrawn immediately. However, the State should be given liberty to issue an appropriate show-cause notice u/s 56(1)(a) & (b) of the Bombay Police Act, if found necessary. 4. Accordingly, the statement of the learned APP is accepted and the notice at Exhibit P to the petition dated 11.4.2008 stands withdrawn. The police may if necessary issue an order against the petitioner u/s 56(1)(a) and (b) for the same offences as are mentioned in the withdrawn notice after following the procedure required u/s 59 of the Bombay Police Act. 5. Criminal application is disposed of accordingly.