Mohammed Azam Usmaan Siddiqui vs The Divisional Commissioner Of Police And Ors

CNR No : HCBM010553272026

918-WP-5930-2026.DOC
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.5930 OF 2026
Mohammed Azam Usmaan Siddiqui …Petitioner
Versus
The Divisional Commissioner of Police And Ors. …Respondents
Mr. Mateen Shaikh a/w Jammu Shaikh, Sharif Shaikh and Muskan
Shaikh, for the Petitioner.
Mr. P. P. Jadhav, APP, for the Respondent/State.
Mr. Ramdas Kolte, PSI, attached Bhoiwada Police Station, present.
CORAM: MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.
rd
DATED : 03 NOVEMBER 2026
JUDGMENT:-
1. Heard Mr. Shaikh, learned Counsel appearing for the
Petitioner and Mr. Jadhav, learned APP, for the Respondent-State.
2. By this Writ Petition, the challenge is to the legality and
rd
validity of order dated 23 December 2025 passed by Deputy
Commissioner of Police, Zone-II, Bhiwandi in Externment Case
th
No.5622 of 2025 as also order dated 27 October 2026 passed by
Divisional Commissioner, Konkan Division, Mumbai in Appeal
No.99 of 2026.
Page 1
Akash
Uploaded on - 05/11/2026 Downloaded on - 05/11/2026 20:53:29

918-WP-5930-2026.DOC
3. It is the submission of Mr. Shaikh, learned Counsel
appearing for the Applicant that total three offences are taken into
consideration, while passing the externment order. Two offences
are of the year 2017 and 2018 respectively and therefore, there is
no live link between those offences and action of externment taken
in the year 2025. As far as the third offence is concerned which is
C.R.No.290 of 2025 registered with Bhoiwada Police Station,
Bhiwandi, the same is under Sections 5(A) and 5(B) of
Maharashtra Animal Preservation Act, 1976 and under Section
11(1)(d) of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960. He
submits that the said offence was under investigation when the
action of externment was taken and therefore the said offence
could not have been taken into consideration. He submits that, in
fact, as far as the said offence being C.R.No.290 of 2025 is
st
concerned, the Division Bench of this Court by order dated 01
August 2025 has granted stay to the said offence. He therefore
submits that, the subjective satisfaction recorded is without any
material on record.
4. On the other hand, learned APP, submits that the subjective
satisfaction recorded is on the basis of record. However, on
Page 2
Akash
Uploaded on - 05/11/2026 Downloaded on - 05/11/2026 20:53:29

918-WP-5930-2026.DOC
instructions, learned APP, states that, after investigation the Police
are proposing to file ‘C-Summary’ as far as C.R.No.290 of 2025 is
concerned.
5. Before consideration of rival submission it is necessary to
set out details of three offences which have taken into
consideration by the Externing Authority as set out in the
impugned order :-
Sr.
No.
Police
Station
Crime Reg. No. Present Status
Under Police
Investigation
1 Bhoiwada 290/2025 Maharashtra Animal
Preservation Act 1976 Section 5(A)(B)
and Prevention of Cruelty to Animals
Act 1960 Section 11(1)(D)
2 Bhoiwada 98/2018 IPC Section 397 read with 1011/2018
Mumbai Police Act Section 37(1), 135
3 Bhoiwada Non-Cognizable Crime Reg. --
No.530/2017 IPC Section 504, 506
6. The above details show that one non-cognizable offence is
taken into consideration and the same is of the year 2017 and
another offence which is taken into consideration is of the year
2018. Therefore it cannot be said that there is any live link
between the action of externment which has been taken in the year
2025 and the said offences of the year 2017 and 2018.
Page 3
Akash
Uploaded on - 05/11/2026 Downloaded on - 05/11/2026 20:53:29

918-WP-5930-2026.DOC
7. It is relevant to note that as far as C.R.No.290 of 2025 is
concerned it was under investigation when the action of
externment was taken.
8. A learned Single Judge in the case of Imtiyaz Hussain
1
Sayyad v. State of Maharashtra & Ors . in Writ Petition No.2805 of
2023 has held that, it is trite that the crimes which are still under
investigation cannot be taken into consideration while passing
externment order, as depending upon the outcome of the
investigation, the investigating agency may or may not send the
accused for trial. Thus the said observations are squarely
applicable to the present case.
9. Apart from the above aspects there is one more aspect which
is very significant. It is required to be noted that action of
externment is taken mainly on the basis of said offence I.e.
C.R.No.290 of 2025 concerning which a Division Bench of this
st
Court has granted ad-interim protection by order dated 01 August
st
2025. The order dated 01 August 2025 passed by the Division
2024 SCC OnLine Bom 442
1
Page 4
Akash
Uploaded on - 05/11/2026 Downloaded on - 05/11/2026 20:53:29

918-WP-5930-2026.DOC
Bench of this Court in Criminal Writ Petition No.3321 of 2025,
reads as under :-
“ 1) Perusal of record prima facie
indicates that, the application of Sections
5A and 5B of the Maharashtra Animal
Preservation Act, 1976, to the present
crime is misplaced.
2) Learned APP seeks time to take
instructions.
nd
3) At his request, stand over to 22
August, 2025.
4) Till the returnable date, ad-interim
relief in terms of prayer clause (b). ”
The said prayer Clause (b) reads as under :-
“ b) Pending hearing and final disposal of
the present Application stay may be granted
on further proceeding arising out of FIR
No.290 of 2025 registered with Bhoiwada
Police Station Bhiwandi for the offences
punishable under section 5A, 5B of
Maharashtra Animal Preservation Act 1976
and under Section 11(1)(D) of Animal Cruelty
Act 1960 in the interest of justice. ”
10. Thus the further proceedings of said FIR No.290 of 2025
have been stayed by the Division Bench by observing that prima
facie Sections 5A and 5B of the Maharashtra Animal Preservation
Page 5
Akash
Uploaded on - 05/11/2026 Downloaded on - 05/11/2026 20:53:29

918-WP-5930-2026.DOC
Act, 1976 are not applicable. Although, Division Bench has stayed
the proceedings and the same is brought to the notice of the
Externing Authority the Respondent No.2 passed the Externment
order which has been confirmed by the Respondent No.1-
Appellate Authority on the basis of registration of the said
C.R.No.290 of 2025.
11. Thus, it is clear that not only the subjective satisfaction
recorded by the Deputy Commissioner, Zone-II, Bhiwandi as also
by the Divisional Commissioner, Konkan Division, Mumbai is
without any material on record but the same is a mala fide action.
By the mala fide action of the State of Maharashtra the
fundamental rights of the Petitioner has been affected and
therefore, it is necessary that the State of Maharashtra should be
directed to pay the costs to the Petitioner. The mala fides are more
apparent from the fact that as contended by the learned APP, on
instructions, that, the State of Maharashtra is proposing to file ‘C-
Summary’ in said C.R. No.290 of 2025 and that other offences
taken into consideration are of the years 2017 and 2018.
12. It is settled legal position that an order of externment is an
Page 6
Akash
Uploaded on - 05/11/2026 Downloaded on - 05/11/2026 20:53:29

918-WP-5930-2026.DOC
extraordinary measure and effect of such order is of depriving a
citizen of his fundamental right of free movement throughout the
2
territory of India
13. It is shocking and surprising that after the Division Bench of
this Court has granted stay to the further proceedings arising out
of C.R.No.290 of 2025, on the basis of the same the Deputy
Commissioner of Police as also Divisional Commissioner, Konkan
Division has passed the impugned orders. It is shocking that after
the proceedings arising out of said C.R.No.290 of 2025 has been
stayed by this Court, on the basis of same the externment order has
been passed violating the fundamental rights of the Petitioner.
14. Considering the facts and circumstances, the following order
is passed :-
(a) Criminal Writ Petition is allowed by setting aside
rd
order dated 23 December 2025 passed by Deputy
Commissioner of Police, Zone-II, Bhiwandi in Externment
2 Deepak s/o Laxman Dongre v. State of Maharashtra, 2022
SCC OnLine SC 99
Page 7
Akash
Uploaded on - 05/11/2026 Downloaded on - 05/11/2026 20:53:29

918-WP-5930-2026.DOC
th
Case No.5622 of 2025 as also order dated 27 October
2026 passed by Divisional Commissioner, Konkan
Division, Mumbai in Appeal No.99 of 2026.
(B) In the facts and circumstances, the State of
Maharashtra shall pay cost of Rs.10,000/- to the
Petitioner within a period of four weeks from today.
15. The Criminal Writ Petition is disposed of in above terms.
[MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.]
Page 8
Akash
Uploaded on - 05/11/2026 Downloaded on - 05/11/2026 20:53:29
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)