Munna @ Laxmi Kurmi vs State of M.P. and Others

Rajendra Menon, J.—Challenging the order Annexure P-2 dated 24.8.2012 passed by the District Magistrate Damoh and the order Annexure P-1 dated 15.11.2012 passed by the Commissioner, Sagar Division exercising powers for externment of petitioner from various districts under the M.P. Rajya Surakhsha Adhiniyam, petitioner has filed this writ petition. On 24.12.2007, the Superintendent of Police, Damoh submitted a report on the basis of which a show-cause notice was issued to the petitioner. Immediately thereafter indicating involvement of petitioner in 10 criminal cases, it was pointed out that because of his criminal activities, he is proposed to be removed from district in question. Out of 10 cases indicated in the show-cause notice, 9 cases were for the period 1994-2006 and the 10th case was of the year 2007 for an offence u/s 25 of the Arms Act. Case No. 9n in the list of cases pertains to offence u/s 302 of IPC and records indicate that petitioner was put to trial in the said case and he has already been acquitted from the charges, as is evident from judgment passed by the Sessions Court on 19.3.2008, available at page 37 of the paper-book. From the records it is seen that even though the show-cause notice u/s 5 of the M.P. Rajya Suraksha Adhiniyam was issued on 24.12.2007 and for a period of 5 years nothing was done, the matter was kept pending and it was only after the petitioner was acquitted from the criminal case on 19.3.2008 that the impugned action was taken on 24.8.2012. If the case for which petitioner is removed from district is decided and petitioner is being acquitted in all the 9 cases and the case at Sr. No. 10 u/s 25 of Arms Act was only pending against him when the action is taken in the matter somehow remove petitioner from district, even after his acquittal in criminal case and as respondents have not produced any material to show that for a period of 3 to 4 years prior to his removal from district, there is any criminal case registered against petitioner. Even after his acquittal for the offence u/s 302 of IPC on 19.3.2008 till taking of the impugned action on 24.8.2012 i.e. for a period of 4 years there is no criminal case registered against the petitioner. It is, therefore, a case where action has been initiated against the petitioner without their being enough material to show that his activities in district in question is detrimental to the interest of society.

That being so, finding action taken be arbitrary and based on extraneous consideration, this petition is allowed, order Annexure P-1 & P-2 are quashed. The petition is allowed and disposed of.