1 2025:CGHC:58774-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPCR No. 615 of 2025 Nitesh Kumar Singh S/o Vishwanath Singh Aged About 36 Years R/o Village- Pauapara, P.O. Bishrampur, Ps- Bishrampur, Th.- Latori, District Surajpur (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Chief Secretary, Mantrayalaya Mahanadi Bhawan, Nawa Raipur, Atal Nagar (C.G.) 2 - Secretary Department Of Home Government Of Chhattisgarh, Mantrayalaya Mahanadi Bhawan, Nawa Raipur, Atal Nagar (C.G.) 3 - Additional Chief Secretary, Government Of Chhattisgarh, Department Of Home, Mantrayalaya Mahanadi Bhawan, Nawa Raipur, Atal Nagar (C.G.) 4 - Director General Of Police Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) SHOAIB ANWAR Digitally signed by SHOAIB ANWAR Date: 2025.12.04 19:06:31 +0530 2 5 - District Magistrate District Surajpur (C.G.) 6 - Superintendent Of Police Surajpur District Surajpur (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) (Cause title taken from CIS) For Petitioner(s) : Shri Vikram Singh Vishwakarma, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Shri S.S. Baghel, Dy. Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru , Judge Order on Board Per Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice 04.12.2025 1. Heard Vikram Singh Vishwakarma, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Shri S.S. Baghel, Dy. Govt. Advocate appearing for the respondents/State. 2. The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with the following prayers: “10.1. That, the order dated 03.10.2025 passed by the Additional Secretary, Home Department, Chhattisgarh (AnnexureP/1) and order dated 10.06.2025 (Annexure P/3) passed by the District Magistrate, Surajpur in 3 Criminal Case No. 2025012601000 21/b-121/2024- 2025 which is on order of banishment from the district under section 5(2)(b) of the Chhattisgarh State Security Act, 1990, be completely cancelled and set- aside. 10.2. That, the Petitioner be given a reasonable opportunity to respond to the allegation leveled against him and to explain his position.” 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that an externment order was passed by the Collector, Surajpur on 10.06.2025, against which the petitioner preferred an appeal before the State Government. However, the said appeal has been dismissed on the ground of delay. It is further submitted that, as reflected in the impugned order of the Collector, a total of 20 criminal cases were shown against the petitioner, out of which 11 preventive cases have already been disposed of and out of the remaining 9 cases, 2 cases under the Penal Code have already been decided, whereas 7 cases are still pending. On this basis, it is urged that the impugned orders passed by the District Magistrate as well as the State Government deserve to be quashed. 4 4. Per contra, learned State counsel opposed the prayer and submitted that the petitioner is a habitual offender and that the Collector, after being satisfied regarding the petitioner’s continuous involvement in anti-social activities, rightly passed the externment order dated 10.06.2025. It is submitted that several criminal cases under various provisions of the Indian Penal Code are pending against the petitioner and, as on date, seven cases are still pending. It is further contended that the petitioner preferred an appeal before the State Government only after expiry of the prescribed limitation period of 30 days, and therefore, the appellate authority has rightly dismissed the appeal on the ground of limitation. 5. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have perused the impugned orders as well as the material available on record. 6. Upon due consideration of the rival submissions and, particularly, the order passed by the District Magistrate on 10.06.2025, it is evident that the petitioner has been involved in various anti-social activities and several criminal cases have been registered against him. As on date, seven cases under the provisions of the IPC, including a case for offence under Section 302, are still pending. In view of the aforesaid facts and 5 circumstances, we are not inclined to interfere with the externment order. 7. 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 shoaib