TMI Blog2003 (8) TMI 588X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... order was confirmed by the Principal Secretary (Appeals and Security) to the Government of Maharashtra, Home Department on 24.1.2002. 3. Briefly stated the facts are: 4. The appellant was served with a notice dated 3rd September, 2001 on 5th September, 2001 issued under Section 59 of the Act by the Assistant Police Commissioner, Aurangabad City. The notice referred to three criminal proceedings registered against the appellant. It was alleged in the notice that movements and activities of the appellant had caused alarm in the locality and created an atmosphere of terror. It contained details of three incidents having occurred within a period of fortnight or a month prior to the date of notice wherein the appellant had threatened the people for seeking their cooperation in teaching a lesson to Hindu community. It was mentioned that the appellant had established contacts with SIMI (Students Islamic Movement of India), an organisation engaged in activities against communal harmony and national security and in such capacity having participated in a programme of burning the effigies of leaders of RSS and VHP, thereby causing communal tension in the locality. It was also alleged th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... greater Bombay and other areas for which a Commissioner has been appointed under Section 7 to the Commissioner and in other area or areas to which the State Government may, by notification in the official Gazette, extend the provisions of this Section, to the District Magistrate, or the Sub-Divisional Magistrate empowered by the State Government in that behalf (a) that the movements or acts of any person are causing or calculated to cause alarm, danger or harm to person or property or (b) that there are reasonable grounds for believing that such person is engaged or is about to be engaged in the commission of an offence involving force or violence or an offence punishable under Chapters XII, XVI or XVII of the Indian Penal Code, or in the abetment of any such offence and when in the opinion of such officer, witnesses are not willing to come forward to give evidence in public against such person by reason of apprehension on their part as regards the safety of their person or property, or (bb) that there are reasonable grounds for believing that such person is acting or is about to act (1) in any manner prejudicial to the maintenance of public order as defined in the Maharashtra Pre ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Other Dangerous Activities Act, 1980. (2) In any manner prejudicial to the maintenance of supplies of commodities essential to the community as defined in the explanation to Sub-section (1) of Section 3 of the Prevention of Black-marketing and Maintenance of Supplies of Essential Commodities Act, 1980. (C) That any outbreak of epidemic disease is likely to result from the continued residence of an immigrant. 11. ''Public Order has been defined under the Maharashtra Prevention of Communal, Antisocial and Other Dangerous Activities Act, 1980. It reads: Acting in any manner prejudicial to the maintenance of public order means - (i) propagating, promoting or attempting to create, or otherwise functioning in such a manner as to create, feelings of enmity or hatred or disharmony on grounds of religion, race, caste, community or language of any persons or class of persons. 12. Learned counsel for the appellant contended that the notice did not contain allegation to the effect that the witnesses were not coming forward to depose against the appellant., whereas the order of exeternment contained satisfaction :of the competent authority on that count. I ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... class of persons. 14. It has not been pointed out that there was any lapse in following the procedure laid down under the Act and the Rules in passing the order of externment. Procedure laid down under the Act culminating in passing of the order of externment was duly followed. Primarily the satisfaction has to be of the authority passing the order. If the satisfaction recorded by the authority is objective and is based on material on record then the courts would not interfere with the order passed by the authority only because another view possibly can be taken. Such satisfaction of the authority can be interfered with only if the satisfaction recorded is either demonstratively perverse based on no evidence, misreading of evidence or which a reasonable person could not form or that the person concerned was not given due opportunity resulting in prejudicing his rights under the Act. 15. In view of the findings recorded by the High Court there is no need for us to examine the case on facts but since the learned counsel for the appellant persisted and took us through the entire evidence present on the record including the statement of three witnesses recorded by the police in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
