Allahabad High Court
JAYCHAND YADAVversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND 4 OTHERS
- Decided
Holding
The Court stayed the externment order and directed the Commissioner to decide the stay application within one month and the appeal within two months.
Summary
Petitioner Jaychand Yadav filed a writ petition under Article 226 seeking a mandamus directing the Commissioner, Gorakhpur Division, to decide his appeal and stay application concerning an externment order passed under Sections 3/4 of the Uttar Pradesh Control of Goondas Act, 1970. The petitioner argued that the externment, based on three cases, was premature and that the pending appeal under Section 6 should be decided before the order takes effect. The Court noted that the appeal is pending before the competent authority and therefore it could not entertain the merits of the externment order. Consequently, the Court directed the Commissioner to decide the stay application within one month and the appeal within two months, and stayed the operation of the externment order until either is disposed. The writ petition was thereafter disposed.
Issues considered
- Whether the High Court can stay the operation of an externment order under Sections 3/4 of the UP Control of Goondas Act pending the decision of an appeal under Section 6.
- Whether a mandamus can be issued directing the appellate authority to decide the appeal and stay application within a stipulated time.
Legislation cited
- Uttar Pradesh Control of Goondas Act, 1970 — s. 3, 4, 6
Subjects
- Article 226
- writ petition
- mandamus
- stay order
- externment
- Control of Goondas Act
- appeal
- habitual offender
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 21514 of 2026
Jaychand Yadav
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of Uttar Pradesh And 4 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Pradeep Kumar Chaurasia
Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 73
HON'BLE SANDEEP JAIN, J.
1. 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 directing Respondent
No.2/Commissioner, Gorakhpur Division, Gorakhpur, to decide the Appeal No.1623
of 2026 (Computerized Case No.C202605000001623), Jaychandra Yadav Vs.
Additional District Magistrate(Judicial), Mahrajganj, under Section 6 UP Control of
Goondas Act,1970, filed by the petitioner herein, expeditiously within certain
stipulated time as fixed by this Hon'ble Court and till disposal of the stay
application/appeal, stay the operation and effect of the externment order dated
22.06.2026 passed by Respondent No.3/Additional District Magistrate(Judicial),
Mahrajganj in Case No.135 of 2026 (Computerized Case No.D202605470000135)
(State Vs. Jaychandra Yadav) under Section 3/4 of the UP Control of Goondas
Act,1970, PS Nautanwa, District Mahrajganj, whereas directing externment of
petitioner for a period of six months."
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that merely on the basis of
three cases, proceedings under Section 3/4 of the U.P. Control of Goondas
Act, 1970 were initiated against the petitioner and by order dated
22.06.2026 passed by the Additional District Magistrate(Judicial),
Mahrajganj, the petitioner has been externed for six months from the
limits of District Mahrajganj, which has been challenged by the petitioner
by filing Appeal No.1623 of 2026 (Computerized Case
No.C202605000001623), Jaychandra Yadav Vs. Additional District
Magistrate(Judicial), Mahrajganj, under Section 6 of U.P. Control of
CRLP No. 21514 of 2026
2
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, Gorakhpur Division, Gorakhpur. Learned counsel for the
petitioner further submitted that till the disposal of the appeal/stay
application, the operation of the impugned order dated 22.06.2026 be
stayed.
3. Learned A.G.A. submits that as per instructions received by him, at
present three cases are registered against the petitioner, which shows that
he is a habitual offender.
4. 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.
5. 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.
6. In view of the above facts, the Commissioner, Gorakhpur Division,
Gorakhpur is directed to decide the stay application in Appeal No.1623 of
2026 (Computerized Case No.C202605000001623), Jaychandra Yadav
Vs. Additional District Magistrate(Judicial), Mahrajganj, under Section 6
of the U.P. Control of Goondas 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.
7. Till the disposal of the stay application or the appeal, whichever is
earlier, the operation of the impugned order dated 22.06.2026 passed by
the Additional District Magistrate(Judicial), Mahrajganj, in Case No.135
of 2026 (Computerized Case No.D202605470000135) (State vs.
Jaychandra Yadav) under Section 3/4 of the UP Control of Goondas Act,
1970, shall remain stayed.
8. Accordingly, the instant writ petition is disposed of.
(Sandeep Jain,J.)
September 9, 2026
Jitendra
Digitally signed by :-
JITENDRA KUMAR PATEL
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…