Allahabad High Court
IMRANversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
Holding
The Court directed the Commissioner to decide the stay application within one month and the appeal within two months and stayed the impugned externalisation order until such disposal.
Summary
Imran challenged an order dated 06.03.2026 by the Additional District Magistrate, Bulandshahr, which externed him for six months under Section 3(1) of the U.P. Control of Goonda Act, 1970. He filed an appeal (No.21 of 2026) under Section 6(1) of the same Act and a stay application, both pending before the Commissioner, Meerut Region. The petitioner sought a writ of mandamus under Article 226 directing the Commissioner to decide the appeal and stay application promptly and to stay the impugned order. The High Court held that it could not examine the merits of the impugned order while the appeal was pending but could direct the appellate authority to dispose of the matters expeditiously. Accordingly, the Court ordered the Commissioner to decide the stay application within one month and the appeal within two months, and stayed the operation of the externalisation order until either is decided. The writ petition was disposed.
Issues considered
- Whether the High Court can issue a mandamus directing the Commissioner to decide an appeal and stay application pending before it under the U.P. Control of Goonda Act, 1970.
- Whether the order of externalisation under Section 3(1) of the U.P. Control of Goonda Act can be stayed pending the resolution of the appeal under Section 6(1).
Legislation cited
- Constitution of India — s. Article 226
- U.P. Control of Goonda Act, 1970 — s. 3(1), 6(1)
Subjects
- writ petition
- mandamus
- stay order
- Control of Goonda Act
- Section 3(1)
- Section 6(1)
- Article 226
- appeal
- externalisation
- habitual offender
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 10143 of 2026
Imran
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Ram Raj Pandey, Shubham Pandey
Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 53
HON'BLE SANDEEP JAIN, J.
1. Supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of the petitioner is taken on
record.
2. The instant writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has
been filed for the following relief:-
"i. Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding directing
the respondent no.2/ Commissioner Meerut Region Meerut to conclude the appeal No.
21 of 2026 (Imran Vs State of U.P.) within short stipulated time and this Hon'ble
Court may graciously be pleased to stay the effect and operation of the order dated
6.3.2026 passed by Additional District Magistrate, Bulandshahr, under section 3 (1)
of U.P. Control of Goonda Act 1970, P.S. Sikandrabad, District Bulandshahr, in Case
No. 4615 of 2024, during the pendency of the instant appeal pending before the
Commissioner, Meerut Region, Meerut.
ii. Issue any order or direction which this hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper
under the facts and circumstances of the present case.
iii. Award cost of writ to the petitioner."
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that merely on the basis of two
cases, proceedings under Section 3(1) of the U.P. Control of Goondas Act,
1970 were initiated by the State and by order dated 06.03.2026 passed by the
Additional District Magistrate(Administration), Bulandshahr, the petitioner
has been externed for six months from the limits of District Bulandshahar,
which has been challenged by the petitioner by filing Appeal No.21 of 2026
(Imran vs. State of U.P.), under Section 6 (1) of U.P. Control of Goondas
Act, 1970, in which a stay application has also been moved but neither the
stay application nor the appeal has been decided by the Commissioner,
CRLP No. 10143 of 2026
2
Meerut Division, Meerut. Learned counsel for the petitioner further
submitted that till the disposal of the appeal, the operation of the impugned
order dated 06.03.2026 be stayed.
4. Learned A.G.A. submits that as per instructions received by him, at
present two cases are registered against the petitioner, which shows that he is
a habitual offender.
5. It is apparent that since the appeal preferred by the petitioner under
Section 6 of the Act, 1970, is pending before the competent authority, as
such, this Court cannot examine the impugned order on merits.
6. In view of this, it would be appropriate that a direction be given to the
appellate authority to decide the appeal as well as stay application
expeditiously.
7. In view of the above facts, the Commissioner, Meerut Division, Meerut is
directed to decide the stay application in Appeal No.21 of 2026 (Imran vs.
State of U.P.), under Section 6 of the Act, 1970, within a period of one
month and the appeal within a period of two months from the date of
production of certified copy of this order.
8. Till the disposal of the stay application or the appeal, whichever is earlier,
the operation of the impugned order dated 06.03.2026 passed by the
Additional District Magistrate(Administration), Bulandshahr in Case
No.4615 of 2024 (State vs. Imran), under Section 3 (1) of U.P. Control of
Goondas Act, 1970, shall remain stayed.
9. Accordingly, the instant writ petition is disposed of.
May 5, 2026
Mayank
(Sandeep Jain,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
MAYANK KUMAR SHARMA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…