AJAY SHRIMANT THORATversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS

                                                                                36-WP-4228-2026.doc


                                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                      CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
ARJUN                                     WRIT PETITION NO.4228 OF 2026
VITTHAL
KUDHEKAR
                      Ajay Shrimant Thorat                                     ...Petitioner
Digitally signed by
ARJUN VITTHAL                 Versus
KUDHEKAR
Date: 2026.09.29      The State of Maharashtra & Ors.                          ...Respondents
21:04:22 +0530
                                                    ——————
                      Mr. Gaurav Pande, for the Petitioner.
                      Mr. S. V. Walve, APP, for the Respondent-State.
                                                      ——————
                                                         Coram: Madhav J. Jamdar, J.
                                                         Date: 29 September 2026
                      P.C.:

                      1.      Heard Mr. Pande, learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner

                      and Mr. Walve, learned APP, for the Respondent-State of Maharashtra.

                      2.      In this Writ Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of

                      India, the challenge is to the legality and validity of the Order dated

                      10th June 2025 passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Police, Zone-6,

                      Chembur, Mumbai in Externment Case No.210 of 2025 and the Order

                      dated 10th March 2026 passed by the Divisional Commissioner, Konkan

                      Division in Externment Appeal No.82 of 2025.

                      3.      It is the submission of Mr. Pande, learned Counsel for the

                      Petitioner, that subjective satisfaction recorded for passing a drastic

                      Order of externment, by which the liberty of the Petitioner is curtailed,

                      in view of the factual position concerning the criminal cases which have

                      been lodged against the present Petitioner is totally perverse and


                      Arjun                                1
                                                       36-WP-4228-2026.doc


illegal. He submits that a total of three cases have been taken into

consideration, out of which two cases are of the years 2017 and 2021.

Therefore, there is no live link between those two cases and the action

of externment. He further submits that, insofar as the third offence,

which has been taken place on 17th February 2025 is concerned, the

same arose out of a dispute while playing badminton, and therefore, on

the basis of the said incident also, no subjective satisfaction can be

recorded for externing the Petitioner. He further submits that, as far as

the show-cause notice is concerned, the notice issued under Section 59

of the Maharashtra Police Act, 1951, mentions that the Petitioner is

proposed to be externed from Mumbai City, Mumbai Suburban and

Thane districts, whereas the impugned Order has been passed by which

the Petitioner has been externed also from Raigad district. He,

therefore, submits that the impugned Orders are totally illegal and,

therefore, required to be quashed and set aside.

4.      On the other hand, Mr. Walve, learned APP, supports the

impugned Orders. He submits that, as there are three offences against

the Petitioner, the action of externment has been taken and, therefore,

the subjective satisfaction has been correctly recorded.

5.      Perusal of the record shows that following three cases are

mentioned in the impugned Order, on the basis of which the action of

externment is taken:


Arjun                              2
                                                            36-WP-4228-2026.doc



        Sr. No. Police Station   C. R. No.      Section/s       Status
          1.    Nehru Nagar      134/2017 353, 332 and 504 Sub-judice
                                          r/w 34 of IPC
          2.    Nehru Nagar      90/2021     323, 324 and 504 Sub-judice
                                             r/w 34 of IPC
          3.    Nehru Nagar      65/2025     74, 79, 115(2), Sub-judice
                                             352, 189(2) and
                                             190 of BNS

6.       Perusal of the above table shows that the first case is of the year

2017 and the second case if of the year 2021. Therefore, there is no live

link between these two cases and the externment action taken in the

year 2025. Insofar as the third case is concerned, the gist of the said

case as set out in the show-cause notice shows that the incident has

taken place regarding some dispute while playing badminton.

7.       In these circumstances, the subjective satisfaction recorded in the

the impugned Order dated 10th June 2025 passed by the Deputy

Commissioner of Police has been recorded without any material to

support the same. The impugned Order dated 10th March 2026 is

passed without taking into consideration the said aspect. Thus, the

impugned Orders are perverse and illegal.

8.       Apart from that, it is required to be noted that the show-cause

notice mentions that the Petitioner is to be externed from Mumbai City,

Mumbai Suburban and Thane districts, whereas the impugned Order has

also been passed with respect to the Raigad district. Thus, the

impugned Orders deserve to be quashed and set aside.


Arjun                                  3
                                                      36-WP-4228-2026.doc


9.       Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of by passing the

following Order:

        The Order dated 10th June 2025 passed by the Deputy

        Commissioner of Police, Zone-6, Chembur, Mumbai in

        Externment Case No.210 of 2025 and the Order dated 10th

        March 2026 passed by the Divisional Commissioner, Konkan

        Division in Externment Appeal No.82 of 2025, are quashed

        and set aside.

                                               [Madhav J. Jamdar, J.]




Arjun                              4