- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:21752 WP No. 16515 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF JUNE, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV WRIT PETITION NO. 16515 OF 2025 (GM-POLICE) BETWEEN: 1. MOHAMMED ANWAR BAJPE S/O. N.A MOHAMMED, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, R/AT NO.5-9/1, MALLALI HOUSE, SURATHKAL ROAD, NEAR CHECK POST, BAJPE, MANGALORE, D.K DISTRICT- 574142. (NAME AND ADDRESS IS MENTIONED AS PER THE AADHAAR CARD) …PETITIONER (BY SRI. LETHIF B., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REP BY ITS SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, 2ND FLOOR, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU-560001. 2. THE SPECIAL EXECUTIVE MAGISTRATE AND DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF POLICE MANGALURU CITY, D.K. DISTRICT-575 001. 3. THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE MANGALURU CITY, D.K.DISTRICT-575 001. Digitally signed by VIDYA G R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:21752 WP No. 16515 of 2025 4. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, BAJPE POLICE STATION, D.K.DISTRICT-575 201. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. K P YASHODHA, LEARNED ADDITIONAL GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS. QUASH THE ORDER DATED 19/05/2025 PASSED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT BEARING NO. 11/S.E.M/K.P.A/M.C./2025 THERE BY PASSING AN ORDER OF EXTERN THE PETITIONER FROM THE MANGALORE CITY, POLICE COMMSSIONERATE TO THE JURISDICTION OF NELAMANGALA RURAL POLICE STATION, BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT, FROM 19.05.2025 TO 18.11.2025. WHICH IS PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-A, AT ABOVE AND ALL FURTHER PROCEEDINGS THERETO, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV ORAL ORDER The petitioner has called in question the validity of the order of externment at Annexure-'A' dated 19.05.2025 passed by respondent No.2. 2. Sri Lethif .B, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned order of externment is liable to be set aside on the sole ground of non-furnishing of report as contemplated under Section 58 of the Karnataka Police - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:21752 WP No. 16515 of 2025 Act, 1963, which has not been adhered to. He submits that non-furnishing of report is contrary to the procedure contemplated under Section 58 of the Karnataka Police Act, 1963. 3. Section 58 of the Karnataka Police Act, 1963 reads as follows:- "58. Hearing to be given before an order is passed under section 54, 55 or 56.—(1) Before an order under section 54, 55 or 56 is passed against any person, the officer acting under any of the said sections or any officer above the rank of an Inspector authorised by that officer shall inform the person in writing of the general nature of the material allegations against him and give him a reasonable opportunity of tendering an explanation regarding them. If such person makes an application for the examination of any witness, produced by him, the authority or officer concerned shall grant such application and examine such witness, unless for reasons to be recorded in writing the authority or officer is of opinion that such application is made for the purpose of vexation or delay. Any written statement put in by such person shall be filed with - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:21752 WP No. 16515 of 2025 the record of the case. Such person shall be entitled to appear before the officer proceeding under this section by a legal practitioner for the purposes of tendering his explanation and examining the witnesses produced by him. (2) The authority or officer proceeding under sub-section (1) may, for the purpose of securing the attendance of any person against whom any order is proposed to be made under section 54, 55 or 56 require such person to appear before him and to furnish a security bond with or without sureties for such attendance during the inquiry. If the person fails to furnish the security bond as required or fails to appear before the officer or authority during the inquiry, it shall be lawful to the officer or authority to proceed with the inquiry and thereupon such order as was proposed to be passed against him may be passed." 4. Learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the respondent State submits that there is a procedural lapse insofar as the report as contemplated under Section 58 of the Karnataka Police Act, 1963 has not been served on the petitioner prior to passing of the impugned order of externment. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:21752 WP No. 16515 of 2025 5. In light of the said stand of learned Additional Government Advocate, the order at Annexure-'A' dated 19.05.2025 is set aside. 6. Needless to state that, if circumstances are so made out, it is always open to the respondents to initiate fresh action strictly in accordance with law. Sd/- (S SUNIL DUTT YADAV) JUDGE VGR