Denying any relief to two men challenging their externment order after criminal offences against them had been resolved, the Bombay High Court said that the settlement of the cases that led to their externment was of no consequence. The reason cited for the quashing of the externment order,the court said,was not at all a convincing one.
In his order,Justice A V Nirgude wrote, ….there is nothing on record to show that the compromise was bonafide and with free will. With regard to the criminal past of the petitioners,the so called transaction of compromise should be seen with necessary suspicion.
Shaikh Hasan Ismail Khan (38) and Hanif Ismail Khan (50),both originally residents of Kanjur Marg,were issued externment orders by the Assistant Commissioner of Police (ACP) of the area on May 26,2011. The police had taken note of the fact that several offences including attempt to murder and murder had been registered against the duo. However,the cases were pending in court.
The police also said that secret witnesses examined by them had stated that they had suffered at the hands of the accused but not dared to complain against them. The ACP issued externment orders under Section 56 of the Bombay Police Act,1961 against the two accused,barring them from entering Mumbai for two years.
The duo,however,contended that in some cases registered against them in 2010,they had arrived at a compromise with the complainants. They had first challenged the ACPs order before the Principal Secretary (Home),who had concurred with the ACP. They urged the high court to quash the externment orders and said that the alleged offences would not stand against them as the cases had been resolved.
Justice Nirgude observed, …the transaction of compromise between the petitioners and the complainants in the cases of 2010 is not of any consequence. At least at present,the petitioners have not secured acquittal in those cases.
The court also stated,It can also be said that the petitioners hurriedly procured the compromise only to get favourable outcome in the appeal proceedings. In my view,this circumstance is hardly of any consequence,compared to the record and circumstances which are adverse to the petitioners.