- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:10747 CRL.P No. 103283 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 103283 OF 2025 (482(CR.PC)/528(BNSS)) BETWEEN: SHRI BHAIRAGOUDA S/O JYOTIBA PATIL. AGE. 45 YEARS, OCC. DRIVER, R/O. PATILGALLI KANABARGI, TQ. AND DIST. BELAGAVI-590 016. … PETITIONER (BY SRI. S.A. NEELOPANT, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, REPRESENTED BY DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF POLICE (LAW AND ORDER) AND SPECIAL EXECUTIVE MAGISTRATE, BELAGAVI CITY, BELAGAVI-590 001, REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BENCH, DHARWAD-583 101. 2. POLICE INSPECTOR, BELAGAVI CITY MALMARUTI POLICE STATION, BELAGAVI-590 001, REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BENCH, DHARWAD-583 101. … RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. GIRIJA S. HIREMATH, HCGP) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C. (UNDER SECTION 528 OF BNSS), PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF EXTERNMENT PASSED BY RESPONDENT NO.1 IN NO./MAG/GA.PA./19/COP/2025 DATED 06.08.2025, THEREBY EXTERNING THE PETITIONER FROM BELAGAVI DISTRICT TO THE RAKESH S HARIHAR Digitally signed by RAKESH S HARIHAR Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:10747 CRL.P No. 103283 of 2025 JURISDICTION OF KARWAR RURAL POLICE STATION DISTRICT KARWAR FROM 06.08.2025 TO 06.11.2025 AS PER ANNEXURE-A. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, ORDER IS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY) 1. Petitioner is before this Court with a prayer to quash the order dated 06.08.2025 passed in proceeding bearing No.MAG/GA.PA./19/COP/2025 by respondent No.1. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned HCGP for respondent Nos.1 and 2. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that order has been passed under Section 56 of the Karnataka Police Act. Petitioner does not qualify for passing of an order under the said provision of law and therefore order impugned is bad in law. 4. Per contra, learned HCGP who has opposed the petition submits that the order impugned has been passed under Section 56(g) of the Karnataka Police Act and petitioner has been convicted for offences punishable under Sections 78, 79 and 80 of the Karnataka Police Act in Crime - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:10747 CRL.P No. 103283 of 2025 No.90 of 2021, Crime No.21 of 2021 and Crime No.125 of 2022 on 19.07.2022. 5. Perusal of the material on record would go to show that as against the petitioner, 10 cases were registered. Section 56 of the Karnataka Police Act provides for removal of persons convicted of certain offences and Section 56(g) provides that if a person is convicted thrice of an offence, within a period of 3 years under Sections 78, 79 and 80 of the Karnataka Police Act, orders under Section 56 of the Karnataka Police Act for removal of the said person from the local limits of the jurisdiction of competent authority can be passed. 6. Perusal of the material on record would go to show that after the petitioner was convicted by order dated 19.07.2022 in Crime No.90 of 2021, Crime No.21 of 2021 and Crime No.125 of 2022, externment order was passed against him externing him for a period of 1 year from 13.09.2023 to 12.09.2024. Thereafter, once again the present order has been passed, taking into consideration - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:10747 CRL.P No. 103283 of 2025 that the petitioner was convicted in the aforesaid three cases. Since externment order was passed as against the petitioner earlier for the same reason, the respondent was not justified in once again passing an externment order taking into consideration that petitioner was convicted in the aforesaid 3 cases without appreciating that an externment order was already passed against him for the very same reason. In addition to the same, perusal of the order would go to show that there is no compliance of Section 58 of the Act in the present case and proper opportunity has not been given to the petitioner by the competent authority. In the show cause notice issued to the petitioner, it is not mentioned whether the proposed action is under Section 55 or under Section 56 of the Act. Under the circumstances, I am of the opinion that the order impugned cannot be sustained. Accordingly, the following: ORDER i. Criminal petition is allowed. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:10747 CRL.P No. 103283 of 2025 ii. The order dated 06.08.2025 passed in proceeding bearing No.MAG/GA.PA./19/ COP/2025 by respondent No.1 is quashed as against the petitioner herein. iii. In view of disposal of the main petition, I.A.No.1/2025 does not survive for consideration. Sd/- (S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY) JUDGE KGK CT:BCK LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 44