939 WP-3068-2026.DOC skt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 3068 OF 2026 Moahammed Rafiq Gulam Rasul Ansari …Petitioner Vs. 1. State of Maharashtra 2. The Deputy Commissioner of Police, Zone-6, Chembur, Mumbai …Respondents Mr. Imran Sheikh a/w. Ruby Shaikh, for the Petitioner. Mr. S.V. Walve, APP a/w. Shahaji Shinde, ‘B’ Panel Counsel for the for the Respondent No.1-State. Sr. PI Dattatray Patil a/w. API Sanjay Nikam and PSI Dipali Pawase, RCF Police Station, Mumbai. CORAM: MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J. DATE : 30th SEPTEMBER, 2026 P. C.: 1. Heard Mr. Sheikh, learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner and Mr. Walve, learned APP for the Respondents. 2. By this Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the challenge is to the legality and validity of the order dated 3rd December 2025 passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Police, Zone 6, Chembur Mumbai in Externment Case No. 471 of 2025 and order dated 21st May 2026 passed by the Divisional Commissioner, Konkan Division, Mumbai in Appeal No. 30th September, 2026 ARJUN VITTHAL KUDHEKAR Digitally signed by ARJUN VITTHAL KUDHEKAR Date: 2026.10.03 21:56:59 +0530 939 WP-3068-2026.DOC skt 180 of 2025. By the impugned order dated 3rd December 2025, the Petitioner has been externed by exercising powers under Section 56 of the Maharashtra Police Act, 1951 for a period of 18 months from the areas of Mumbai City, Mumbai Suburban, Belapur and Panvel District. 3. It is the submission of Mr. Sheikh, learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner that the Petitioner is belonging to Social Democratic Party of India which is registered with the Election Commission under Section 29(a) of the Representation of People’s Act as a political party and the Petitioner is a member of said political party. He submits that the show cause notice is issued on the basis of eight offences registered against the Petitioner. He submits that except the offence bearing C.R. No.53 of 2024 registered with R.C.F. Police Station, the other offences are concerning the participation of the Petitioner concerning agitation/morchas/dharnas organized by the said Social Democratic Party of India with respect to various issues. He further submits that as far as the two offences bearing C.R. No. 180 of 2022 and C.R. No. 457 of 2025 and one NC are under 30th September, 2026 939 WP-3068-2026.DOC skt investigation and therefore the same could not have been taken into consideration while passing the order of externment. 4. On the other hand, Mr. Walve, learned APP submits that there are total eight offences registered against the Petitioner. Apart from that, there is one NC and, therefore, the order of externment is rightly passed. 5. Perusal of the record shows that while passing the order of externment dated 3rd December 2025, the following eight cases are taken into consideration :- Sr. No. Police Statio n Sections Date of Incident Court Case No. & Date Present Status 1 R.C.F. C.R. No. 383/2019 – Section 188 IPC read with Sections 37(1), 135 of the Maharashtra Police Act 11/12/2019 1183/ PS/ 2020 Pending before Court 2 R.C.F. C.R. No. 424/2020 – Sections 269, 270 IPC read with Sections 37(1), 135 of the Maharashtra Police Act 06/12/2020 2872/ PS/ 2021 Pending before Court 3 R.C.F. C.R. No. 619/2021 – Section 188 IPC read with Sections 37(1), 37(3), 135 of the Maharashtra Police Act 29/10/2021 7606/ PS/ 2022 Pending before Court 30th September, 2026 939 WP-3068-2026.DOC skt Sr. No. Police Statio n Sections Date of Incident Court Case No. & Date Present Status 4 R.C.F. C.R. No. 354/2022 – Section 188 IPC read with Sections 37(3), 135 of the Maharashtra Police Act 17/05/2022 8239/ PS/ 2022 Pending before Court 5 R.C.F. C.R. No. 53/2024 – Sections 323, 504, 506(2), 34 IPC read with Section 3(1),(q), (r),(s),(u),(z),(w),(p) of the Atrocity Act 18/01/2024 0542/ SPL/ 2024 Pending before Court 6 R.C.F. C.R. No. 636/2024 – Sections 223, 3(5) BNS read with Sections 37(3), 135 of the Maharashtra Police Act 06/12/2024 6115/ PS/ 2025 Pending before Court 7 R.C.F. C.R. No. 180/2025 – Section 223 BNS read with Sections 37(3), 135 of the Maharashtra Police Act 02/04/2025 — Investigat ion in progress 8 R.C.F. C.R. No. 459/2025 – Sections 223, 285 BNS read with Sections 37(3), 135 of the Maharashtra Police Act 21/08/2025 — Investigat ion in progress 6. Perusal of the above chart clearly shows that as far as C.R. No. 180 of 2025 and C.R. No.459 of 2025 are concerned they were under investigation and, therefore, could not have been taken into consideration. 30th September, 2026 939 WP-3068-2026.DOC skt 7. A learned Single Judge of this Court in the case of Imtiyaz Hussain Sayyad Vs. The State of Maharashtra & Ors. 1 has held that it is trite that the crimes under investigation cannot be taken into consideration as depending upon the outcome of the investigation, the investigating agency may or may not send the accused for trial. Thus, the last two offences which were registered on 2nd April 2024 and 21st August 2025, respectively, could not have been taken into consideration while passing the externment order. 8. In view of above, it is required to be noted that the show cause notice has been issued on 20th October 2025. The offences in which charge-sheet is filed and is mentioned in the show cause notice are of the years 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022 and 2024. Therefore, there is no live link between these offences and the action of externment. 9. Apart from that, it is required to be noted that the offences which are mentioned in the above chart at Sr. No. 1 to 4 and 6 are concerning participation of the Petitioner in agitation/morchas/dharnas which were organized by the said 1 Criminal Writ Petition No. 2805 of 2023 dt. 19th January 2024 30th September, 2026 939 WP-3068-2026.DOC skt Social Democratic Party of India with respect to certain decisions of the Central Government. 10. Mr. Sheikh, learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner has relied on the decision of this Court in the case of Saeed Ahmad Abdul Wahid Chaudhary Vs. The State of Maharashtra & Anr. 2. The paragraph Nos. 5 to 16 of the said decision are relevant and reproduced hereinbelow : “5. It is an admitted position that, the Petitioner in his capacity as the Secretary of the Social Democratic Party of India, has arranged agitations/morchas/dharnas with respect to the certain decisions taken by the Government of India. The action is taken under Section 56 1(a) of the Maharashtra Police Act. Relevant portion of Section 56 of the Maharashtra Police Act reads as under: “56. Removal of persons about to commit offence.— [(1)] Whenever it shall appear in [Brihan Mumbai] and other areas for which a Commissioner has been appointed under section 7 to the Commissioner and in other area or areas to which the State Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, extend the 2 Writ Petition No.1700 of 2026 dt. 2nd July 2026 30th September, 2026 939 WP-3068-2026.DOC skt provisions of this section, to the District Magistrate, or the Sub-Divisional Magistrate specially empowered by the State Government in that behalf (a) that the movements or acts of any person are causing or calculated to cause alarm, danger or harm to person or property, or (b) that there are reasonable grounds for believing that such person is engaged or is about to be engaged in the commission of an offence involving force or violence or an offence punishable under Chapter XII, XVI or XVII of the Indian Penal Code (XLV of 1860), or in the abatement of any such offence and when in the opinion of such officer witnesses are not willing to come forward to give evidence in public against such person by reason of apprehension on their part as regards the safety of their person or property, …” 6. Thus, what is contemplated by Section 56 1(a) is that the movements or acts of any person are causing or calculated to cause alarm, danger or harm to person or property then action of externment can be taken. Sub- Section 1(b) of Section 56 provides that there are reasonable grounds for believing that such person is engaged or is about to be engaged in the commission of an offence involving force or violence or an offence punishable under Chapter XII, XVI or XVII of IPC. All these offences are against human body. Page 7 of 12 30th September, 2026 939 WP-3068-2026.DOC skt 7. There is no material on record to show that the movements or acts of the Petitioner are causing or calculated to cause alarm, danger or harm to person or property. In all these FIR, the allegation is that the Petitioner, in his capacity as the Secretary of the Social Democratic Party of India, has arranged agitations/morchas/dharnas, opposing certain decisions taken by the Government of India. The other allegation is that such agitations/morchas/dharnas have been arranged without permission of the Police. The same is an offence under Section 188 of the IPC and maximum punishment is of simple imprisonment of one month. However, that cannot be a ground for passing the externment order under the provisions of the Maharashtra Police Act. 8. There is substance in the contention raised by Ms. Roy, learned Counsel for the Petitioner, that the action taken is a mala fide action. 9. Although the Externment Proposal, the details of which are set out in the Affidavit-in-Reply, records that the movements and acts of the Petitioner are causing or are calculated to cause, alarm, danger and harm to the public 30th September, 2026 939 WP-3068-2026.DOC skt and property, perusal of the FIRs on the basis of which action is taken and the gist of which is set out in the Affidvit-in-Reply shows that the only allegation is that the Petitioner has arranged agitations/morchas/dharnas against certain decisions of the Union of India and given slogans. Thus, the subjective satisfaction recorded by the authorities that movements and acts of the Petitioner are causing or are calculated to cause, alarm, danger and harm to the public and property, is without any material to support the same. Thus, the subjective satisfaction is vitiated. 10. It is settled legal position that an order of externment is an extraordinary measure and effect of such order is of depriving a citizen of his fundamental right of free movement throughout the territory of India3. 11. Articles 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India inter alia contemplates that not only the citizens have the freedom of speech and expression, but they also have the right to live with dignity. 3 Deepak s/o Laxman Dongre v. State of Maharashtra, 2022 SCC OnLine SC 99 30th September, 2026 939 WP-3068-2026.DOC skt 12. The action taken by the Respondent–State of Maharashtra of externing the Petitioner, merely for opposing certain decisions of the Government of India, affects the Petitioner's fundamental right of freedom of speech and expression and also right to live with dignity. 13. Ms. Roy, learned Counsel for the Petitioner relied on the decision of the Supreme Court in Anuradha Bhasin (supra), as also the decision of the Gujarat High Court in Mohmmad Kaleem Taufiq Ahmed Siddiqui (supra). 14. The Supreme Court in Anuradha Bhasin (supra), in the context of Section 144 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, has held that the power under said Section cannot be used to suppress legitimate expression of opinion or grievance or exercise of any democratic rights. 15. The Gujarat High Court in Mohmmad Kaleem Taufiq Ahmed Siddiqui (supra) in a similar case, wherein an order of externment had been passed against the Petitioner in that case for prote sting a decision of the Union of India, observed that a citizen cannot be 30th September, 2026 939 WP-3068-2026.DOC skt subjected to externment merely for raising grievances against the Government and, therefore, the order of externment was liable to be set aside. 16. The said observations of the Supreme Court and the Gujarat High Court are squarely applicable to the present case.” (Emphasis added) The reasoning in above paragraphs is also applicable to the present case. 11. As far as C.R. No. 53 of 2024, which has been taken into consideration by the Externing Authority while passing the order of externment against the Petitioner is registered on 18th January 2024. As show cause notice has been issued on 20th October 2025, i.e., after a period of 20 months after registrtion of the said offence, there is no live link between the said offence and the action of externment. 12. It is also required to be noted that the offence in C.R.No. 53 of 2024 has taken place on 30th August 2023 and on 4th September 2023 but the F.I.R. has been registered on 18th January 2024. Thus 30th September, 2026 939 WP-3068-2026.DOC skt the said C.R. No. 53 of 2024 could not been taken into consideration while passing the order of externment against the Petitioner. 13. Accordingly, interference in the impugned order is warranted. The Writ Petition is disposed of by passing the following order : (a) The order dated 3rd December 2025 passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Police, Zone 6, Chembur Mumbai in Externment Case No. 471 of 2025 and order dated 21st May 2026 passed by the Divisional Commissioner, Konkan Division, Mumbai in Appeal No. 180 of 2025 are hereby quashed and set aside. 14. The Writ Petition is disposed of in the above terms. [MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.] 30th September, 2026