102 Cri. WP-701-2026 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR. CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.701 OF 2026 [Junaid Khan Mehboob Khan ..vs.. State of Maharashtra and others] ______________________________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders of directions Court's or Judge's order and Registrar's orders. Shri. Parvez Mirza, Advocate for Petitioner. Ms. S. S. Jachak, Addl. P. P. for Respondents/State. CORAM : URMILA JOSHI-PHALKE AND RAJ D. WAKODE, JJ. DATE : 7 th SEPTEMBER , 2026 . . Heard Shri. Parvez Mirza, learned counsel for petitioner and Ms. S. S. Jachak, learned Addl. P. P. for the respondents/State. 2. The petitioner has approached this Court seeking challenge to the impugned show cause notice dated 26th May, 2026 issued by the learned Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Murtizapur, thereby calling upon the petitioner as to why an order of externment should not be passed against him. The aforesaid notice is at record page No.15 (Annexure-A). 3. Shri. Mirza, learned counsel, submits that respondent No.3, while issuing such show cause notice, has not specifically mentioned the provisions of Section 56(1) of the Maharashtra Police Act, 1951 (hereinafter referred to as, “the aforesaid Act”, for the sake of brevity), as to under which clause the proposed action has been initiated. Further, he has pointed out the contradiction pertaining to the area of externment in the report submitted by the Sub-Divisional Police Officer, Murtizapur, and the impugned show cause notice issued by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Murtizapur. However, the fact remains that the petitioner has merely been issued a show cause notice calling upon him to submit his explanation and raise the grounds opposing such externment, which the petitioner can very well do before respondent No.3. 2026:BHC-NAG:11840-DB 102 Cri. WP-701-2026 2 4. In view of the above, Shri. Mirza, learned counsel, upon instructions, seeks permission to withdraw the present petition with liberty to file a detailed reply raising all the grounds as raised before this Court before the learned Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Murtizapur, thereby opposing the impugned show cause notice of externment. 5. Respondent No.3 is directed to consider all the grounds raised in the reply and decide the same in accordance with law and on its own merits. After considering the reply submitted by the petitioner, if respondent No.3 comes to a conclusion that the petitioner needs to be externed, the aforesaid adverse order shall be kept in abeyance for a period of seven days in order to enable the petitioner to take recourse to the statutory appeal under Section 60 of the aforesaid Act. 6. The present writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of. (RAJ D. WAKODE, J.) (URMILA JOSHI-PHALKE, J.) TAMBE Signed by: Mr. Ashish Tambe Designation: PA To Honourable Judge Date: 07/09/2026 20:26:57