1 2025:CGHC:26031-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPCR No. 335 of 2025 1 Dev Nishad Alias Bhata S/o Gangaram Nishad Aged About 22 Years R/o Ward No.-19, Subhash Chowk, Rajhara, Police Station - Rajhara, District -Balod, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Home Affairs, Mahanadi Bhawan, Nawa Raipur (C.G.) 2 District Magistrate District -Balod, Chhattisgarh 3 Superintendent Of Police District -Balod, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner : Mr. Ishan Verma , Advocate. For Respondents/State : Mr. Shashank Thakur, Dy. A.G. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru , Judge Order on Board Per Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice JYOTI SHARMA Digitally signed by JYOTI SHARMA Date: 2025.06.20 17:44:04 +0530 2 20.06.2025 1. Heard Mr.Ishan Verma, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. Shashank Thakur, learned Deputy Advocate General appearing for the respondents/State. 2. The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with the following prayers: “i. Call for the records of the case; 10.2. Quash the appellate order dated 27.02.2025 passed by the Under Secretary, Department of Home Affairs, Government of Chhattisgarh, affirming the order of externment; 10.3. Quash the impugned order dated 30.09.2024 passed by the Distric Magistrate, Balod, Chhattisgarh in the interest of justice; 10.4. Pass such other and further order(s) as may be deemed just and pro in the facts and circumstances of the present case.” 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that impugned order dated 27.02.2025 passed by the Under Secretary, Department of Home Affairs, Government of C.G., whereby the appeal preferred by the petitioner was dismissed and the externment order dated 03.09.2024 passed by the District Magistrate, Balod was affirmed. He further submits that by the externment order the petitioner was directed to 3 remain outside the territorial limits of District Balod and its adjoining districts for a period of one year under Sections 5 and 6 of the C.G. Rajya Suraksha Adhiniyam, 1990. 4. He further submits that the impugned order has been passed in mechanical and arbitrary manner. He further submits that initially a show cause notice was issued to the petitioner by the District Magistrate based on a report dated 08.04.2024 submitted by the Superintendent of Police, Balod for initiation of proceedings under Sections 5 & 6 of C.G. Rajya Suraksha Adhiniyam, 1990. He submits that the show cause notice referred to several past criminal cases against the petitioner but the petitioner has been acquitted in most of the criminal cases and some of them have been entered into compromise, but despite that the impugned order has been passed. He further submits that the petitioner has already suffered externment for a period of about eight months and 17 days and prays that the impugned orders be quashed. 5. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner and submits that order of externment is just and proper which do not require any interference by this court. 6. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the impugned order and the material available on record. 7. Perusal of the records shows that total 13 cases were registered against the present petitioner and the appeal of the petitioner was dismissed on this ground by the appellate authority. 4 8. Considering the same, we are of the view that though the petitioner has been acquitted in most of the cases, but all are on the basis of compromise and the petitioner may have pressurized the respective victims for compromise, thus we are not inclined to entertain this petition. 9. Accordingly, the present WPCR, being bereft of merits is liable to be and is hereby dismissed at the motion stage itself. Sd/- Sd/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Jyoti/ Saurabh