1 27-Cr.WP-983-2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR. CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 983 OF 2025 Mr. Nikhil S/o Prabhakar Tighare -- VERSUS -- The State of Maharashtra and Others __________________________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders of directions Court's or Judge's orders. and Registrar's Orders. Mr. V.Gadbayle, Advocate h/f. Mr. R.L. Kadu, Advocate for the Petitioner. Mr. A.M. Joshi, A.P.P. for Respondents/State. CORAM : M.M. NERLIKAR, J. DATE : DECEMBER 04, 2025. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.P.P. 2. A short issue is involved in the present petition. By an order dated 28/08/2025, respondent No.2, externed the petitioner for a period of 6 months from the Bhandara District. In an appeal preferred by the petitioner, the Divisional Commissioner has modified the order to the extent of externment of 3 months vide order dated 30/10/2025. Both the orders are under challenge before this Court. 3. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.P.P. It appears from the 2025:BHC-NAG:13528 2 27-Cr.WP-983-2025 record that the notice issued under Section 59 of the Maharashtra Police Act, does not refer to the in- camera statements recorded by the sponsoring authority. However, the impugned order passed by the respondent No.2 states that confidential statements / in-camera statements were recorded by the sponsoring authority. Admittedly, there is not even a slightest reference in the notice issued under Section 59 about recording of the in-camera statements. Section 59 speaks about hearing to be given before order under Sections 55, [56, 57 or 57A] is passed. It mandates issuance of notice in writing stating therein the general nature of the material allegations against the externee and giving a reasonable opportunity of tendering an explanation regarding the allegations to the externee. It is necessary to mention that if the notice does not contain the gist of material allegations, then it would tantamount to denial of the opportunity of hearing to the externee. Externment proceedings takes away the fundamental right of a person provided under Article 19(1)(d) of the Constitution of India, therefore, if the mandatory provision is not followed in its true letter and spirit, then the entire proceedings initiated would be vitiated. As was observed above, the notice issued under Section 59 does not comply with the requirements of Section 59, and hence the entire 3 27-Cr.WP-983-2025 proceedings stand vitiated. Hence, the following order:- O R D E R (i) The Criminal Writ Petition is allowed; (ii) The impugned order dated 28/08/2025 passed by Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Bhandara and the impugned order dated 30/10/2025 passed by Divisional Commissioner, Nagpur, are hereby quashed and set aside. [ M.M. NERLIKAR, J ] Piyush Mahajan