Full Judgment Text
$~63
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
th
% Date of decision: 10 October, 2025
+ W.P.(CRL) 2349/2025 & CRL.M.A. 30251/2025
MAHESH SHRIVASTVA @ JEEVA
S/o Sh. Brij Kishore .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Ashish Upadhyay & Mr. Pradeep
Kumar Mishra, Advocates.
versus
STATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI)
Through Additional Deputy Commissioner of Police-I,
South District, Delhi .....Respondent
Through: Mr. Yasir Rauf Ansari, ASC with
Mr. Alok Sharma, Advocate.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA
J U D G M E N T (oral)
1. Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, 1950 read
with Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023
( hereinafter referred to as „B.N.S.S‟ ) has been filed on behalf of the
Petitioner/Mahesh Shrivastva @ Jeeva for quashing of the Order dated
15.07.2025 in Case No. 103/2025 of the Hon‟ble Lieutenant Governor of
Delhi, upholding the Externment Order dated 24.05.2025 ( with a partial
modification in the period of externment ) of the Additional Deputy
Commissioner of Police-I, South District, Delhi.
2. Brief facts are that the Petitioner was born on 02.12.1982 and since
Signature Not Verified
W.P.(CRL) 2349/2025 Page 1 of 22
Signed By:VIKAS
ARORA
Signing Date:16.10.2025
11:09:42
1988, is residing at S-12/121, Indira Gandhi Camp, Near Khanna Market,
Lodhi Colony, New Delhi. He got married to Ms. Rekha in the year 2005
and has been blessed with two children, namely, Umesh Srivastav and
Updesh Srivastav, aged 17 years and 14 years respectively. Elder son is
studying in Class XI while the younger son is a student of Class IX and has
represented India in Kabbadi (Sports Activities), Junior Category held at
Nepal.
3. The Petitioner further submits that he has faced trial in eight Criminal
Cases till 2021 and has been acquitted in all the cases, except in one case in
which he pleaded guilty and deposited the fine of Rs.500/-.
4. The past, however, has continued to haunt the Petitioner and the
Police Officials, without any cause registered Kalandra under Section
107/151 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ( hereinafter referred to
as „Cr.P.C.‟ ) but those proceedings were also closed.
5. The Petitioner has joined the main stream of the society with the
passage of time and is in regular employment. From 2018 till March, 2020,
he was employed in a shop situated in Tisra Pushta, Gali No. 9, Khajuri
where the Car Seat Covers etc. manufactured. Post lockdown due to Covid,
there was no business. Thereafter, since 23.10.2022, he has been employed
with the New Concept Services having its Office at Khasra No. 54/1, 54/3,
54/7, IInd Avenue, Bandh Road, Amin Farm, Chandan Hola, New Delhi-
110074, as Event Supervisor and has continued in employment with no
involvement in any criminal activities.
6. The Petitioner states that he is living in vicinity where number of
crimes take place and he has rendered valuable assistance to the Police as
the informer and helped them in solving various cases, which eventually
Signature Not Verified
W.P.(CRL) 2349/2025 Page 2 of 22
Signed By:VIKAS
ARORA
Signing Date:16.10.2025
11:09:42
has led to the enmity of the Petitioner with other criminals who have
developed hatred against him, as the entire setup of gambling in the
vicinity, has been closed by the Police Officials, on account of the inputs of
the Petitioner. All this has led to issues with some Police Officials and the
Petitioner has always found himself to be in a tough spot with threats
extended to involve him in false Criminal Cases.
7. For the last five years i.e. from 2018-2023, he has been living a
peaceful life. There are some antisocial elements, who have ill will and
hostile feelings against him. He has been falsely implicated in the year 2023
in FIR No. 195/2023 under Section 324/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860
( hereinafter referred to as „IPC‟ ), registered at Police Station Lodhi
Colony. It is claimed that this false implication is on account of the
Petitioner‟s endeavour for better future.
8. It is now becoming a challenge for him to provide information as the
persons, who got arrested because of the information conveyed by him, are
having enmity. The Petitioner sensing this threat, had made first
Representation to the Senior Police Officials on 05.10.2023 about his
apprehension of being falsely implicated in a Criminal Case. He was aware
that he can be implicated merely on the Statement of any person or even
Police Officials, without appreciating the support given by him to the Police
Officials.
9. On 26.11.2023, he was again implicated in false FIR of Arms Act.
The Police Officials of Special Staff forcefully took him in their Car while
he was purchasing Vegetables and then a Knife was planted on him. Even
three-four calls at 112 were made by his son, Umesh from his Mobile
Number 8929942151, who informed the Police that his father has been
Signature Not Verified
W.P.(CRL) 2349/2025 Page 3 of 22
Signed By:VIKAS
ARORA
Signing Date:16.10.2025
11:09:42
apprehended/kidnapped by some unknown persons. He has been admitted
to Bail by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate. Several criminals sell
substance/narcotics in the vicinity about which the Petitioner has informed
the Police Officials, which again has triggered the enmity of the Petitioner
with the local criminals, as well as, the Police Officials, who are assisting in
running this syndicate.
10. On 17.03.2024 at about 07:00 p.m, three unknown persons in
Wangon R bearing Registration No. DL 6C S 2929 came inside the street
on which the house of the Petitioner is situated and sought information
about him. On the Petitioner revealing his name, one person while pulling
his shirt, stated “ Aaj to yeh lamba jayega….le chalo isko ”. All these acts are
duly recorded in the CCTV footage. In the meanwhile, some neighbours
collected and started asking those persons for their Identity Card. After they
saw that number of persons have gathered on the spot and the Petitioner
also made a call at No. 112. Those persons claimed that they were Police
Officials and threatened that “Agli Baar teri……main Goli Marenge”
“Dekte Hai Kaun Bchata Hai.” They have even threatened the elder son of
the Petitioner of false implication in the criminal case.
11. The Petitioner lodged a Complaint through E Mail on 19.03.2024
with the Commissioner of Police, DCP South, Police Station Hauz Khas,
ACP, Police Station Defence Colony and SHO, Police Station Lodhi
Colony, New Delhi with evidences, but no action was taken. However,
Notice under Section 50 of Delhi Police Act dated 16.04.2024 for
Externment proceedings was received by the Petitioner and he regularly
attended the proceedings and filed his detailed Reply.
12. Subsequently, SI Prakash Meena, who had earlier visited his house,
Signature Not Verified
W.P.(CRL) 2349/2025 Page 4 of 22
Signed By:VIKAS
ARORA
Signing Date:16.10.2025
11:09:42
started demanding gratification from the Petitioner, through contacts and
stated that he would implicate the Petitioner in a false criminal case if he
did not agree. The Petitioner, however, could not accede to such demands
as he was not having financial resources being employed in a small Firm,
on a monthly salary.
13. Again on 14.11.2024, at about 09:15 p.m., Sub Inspector Parkash
Meena and three other Police Officials forcibly entered into his house and
kicked his minor son and started abusing him and gave threats. They
snatched his mobile, which scared him. The minor son was forced to
remove his T Shirt and was abused. The son of the Petitioner informed that
his father and mother were not at home, but then they pushed him outside
the house. They even misbehaved with him outside the house, which caused
him a lot of mental trauma. After the Petitioner was informed by the
neighbours, he immediately rushed back to his home but by that time, the
Police Officials had left.
14. He called Sub Inspector Parkash Meena late in the evening, who
asked him to meet them. He enquired to which they stated “tujhe bada
wakil banana hai….siddha aa ja nahi to is baar lambe case main dallonga
tujhe aur tere bete ko”. He again made a Complaint dated 19.11.2024
through E Mail along with the Videos of the incident to the Senior Police
Officials but no action was taken. He filed a Writ Petition bearing
W.P.(Crl.) No. 3803/2024 and this Court. Vide Order dated 05.12.2024 the
Commissioner of Police was directed to treat the Writ Petition as a
Representation and to decide the matter expeditiously.
15. The allegations against the Petitioner as made by the Respondent, are
that the SHO, Lodhi Colony reported that the Petitioner has been engaging
Signature Not Verified
W.P.(CRL) 2349/2025 Page 5 of 22
Signed By:VIKAS
ARORA
Signing Date:16.10.2025
11:09:42
himself in the commission of illegal acts and criminal activities. His illegal
activities and movements in the NCT of Delhi, are calculated to cause
alarm, danger, harm and disturbing societal peace. He is a potential source
of harming public at large, which conclusion is based on the
aforementioned ten FIRs. It was further stated that the Petitioner‟s presence
in the NCT of Delhi, was hazardous to the community.
16. The Externment Proceedings were initiated on 16.04.2024 as per the
Provisions of the Delhi Police Act, 1978. The learned Additional Deputy
Commissioner of Police-I, South District, Delhi by its Order dated
24.04.2025, directed the Petitioner to remove himself beyond the limits of
NCT of Delhi for a period of one years within seven days from the date of
Order. He was further directed not to enter or return to the limits of NCT of
Delhi, during that period, without written permission of the competent
authority.
17. The impugned Order dated 24.04.2025 of Additional Deputy
Commissioner of Police-I, South District, Delhi was challenged before the
Hon‟ble Lieutenant Governor of Delhi but the Externment Order was
upheld vide Order dated 24.05.2025, though the period of externment was
reduced to eight months.
18. The Petitioner submits that he is in regular employment, as is evident
from his Form No. 26 for Financial Year 2024-2025, issued by his
employer. Despite the fact that he is not a criminal and is well settled in life,
the Order dated 24.04.2024 for Externment for a period of one year, has
been passed.
19. This Order was challenged by way of Appeal, but the Hon‟ble
Lieutenant Governor vide Order dated 15.07.2025 has upheld the Order of
Signature Not Verified
W.P.(CRL) 2349/2025 Page 6 of 22
Signed By:VIKAS
ARORA
Signing Date:16.10.2025
11:09:42
Externment. However, the period has been reduced to eight months instead
of one year.
20. Since the date of Order i.e. 24.04.2025, the Petitioner is not residing
in Delhi and has to apply for leaves in his Office. Unfortunately, in addition
to the unpaid leaves, the Petitioner‟s family is facing another medical
urgency as the elder son aged about 19 years of the Petitioner, is suffering
from some infection and the doctors have advised major surgery. He was
taken to Safdarjung Hospital and presently, is undergoing treatment in Holy
Family Hospital as the Government Hospital could not provide any relief to
the son from his suffering. He requires immediate medical attention for
which some major expenses are required to be met.
21. The Externment Order is challenged on the grounds that it has been
made without proper application of mind, in a totally mechanical manner. It
has not been considered by the Lieutenant Governor of Delhi that an
independent analysis of the allegations or procedural irregularities was
required to be considered independently in the Appeal.
22. The Respondent has failed to establish any immediate danger or
threat by the Petitioner to public safety and there is no substantive evidence
to this effect.
23. Reliance is placed on Prem Chand vs. Union of Indian, 1981 (1) SCC
639 wherein it was observed that mere police apprehension is not enough
and there must be a clear and present danger based upon credible material
which makes the movements and acts of the person in question alarming or
dangerous or fraught with violence.
24. The impugned Order lacks reasonable foundation as it does not
demonstrate these pertinent facts while making the Order. It has also not
Signature Not Verified
W.P.(CRL) 2349/2025 Page 7 of 22
Signed By:VIKAS
ARORA
Signing Date:16.10.2025
11:09:42
been demonstrated that the witnesses, if any, were indeed unwilling to
testify against the Petitioner. Moreover, the proceedings were conducted in
a biased and arbitrary manner without following due process of law and
giving opportunity to the Petitioner, to defend himself.
25. The Externment Order has not only restricted his ability to earn the
livelihood but has also prevented him from taking care of his ailing parents.
Moreover, the facts germane to Section 47 of the Delhi Police Act, have not
been satisfied. In the light of the livelihood and the previous conduct of the
Petitioner, it is evident that he is not likely to commit an offence and does
not pose a threat to Public Order.
26. The Reply filed by the Petitioner at the time of hearing, has not been
considered. He claims that he never committed any alleged offence nor was
he involved in any manner, but has been implicated falsely in the alleged
offences. He has been enlarged on Bail in all the cases. The Petitioner
claims that he is a respectable citizen of society and is a sole bread earner in
the family. He is innocent and has deep roots in the society. If the
Externment Order is not quashed, his freedom and liberty would be
curtailed and his family would come to starvation as they have no other
source of income.
27. A prayer is, therefore, made that the Impugned Order dated
15.07.2025 passed in Complaint Case No. 103/2025 by the Hon‟ble
Lieutenant Governor of Delhi, may be set-aside.
28. Status Report has been filed on behalf of the Respondent wherein it
is asserted that the Petitioner is a desperate criminal having involvement in
different types of serious 11 cases, which include Abduction, Extortion,
attempt to commit culpable homicide, hurt by dangerous weapon, assault,
Signature Not Verified
W.P.(CRL) 2349/2025 Page 8 of 22
Signed By:VIKAS
ARORA
Signing Date:16.10.2025
11:09:42
which are punishable under Chapter XVI of IPC, Gambling Act, Delhi
Excise Act and Arms Act.
29. The Respondent has claimed that he has been continuing his criminal
activities and engaging himself in the commission of offence and his
criminal activities are a great menace to the society. He is so desperate and
dangerous that his presence in the NCT of Delhi or in any part thereof, is
hazardous to the community.
30. Additional Deputy Commissioner of Police-I, South District, Delhi,
after analyzing the material and considering the proposal carefully, initiated
the proceedings for Externment. Due procedures were followed and the
Notice under Section 50 Delhi Polic Act, was got served upon the
Petitioner, who appeared before the Additional DCP on 30.04.2024. He was
informed about the general nature of material allegation against him in
vernacular, to which he pleaded guilty and claimed trial. He submitted his
detailed Reply to the Notice under Section 50 of the Delhi Police Act and
also produced his surety. He was also informed about his right to engage a
counsel.
31. The Prosecution examined two witnesses, namely, PW-1, Inspector
Rajesh Kumar, SHO, Police Station Lodhi Colony, who deposed about the
criminal character of the Petitioner because of which no one dares to depose
against him. There is a threat to the person and property of such persons at
the hands of the Petitioner. He is a habitual offender and therefore, his
externment for two years, is sought.
32. PW-2, Head Constable, Rinku MHC(R) of Police Station Lodhi
Colony, proved the cases registered against the Petitioner, as per the record.
The opportunity was given to the Petitioner, to cross-examine both the
Signature Not Verified
W.P.(CRL) 2349/2025 Page 9 of 22
Signed By:VIKAS
ARORA
Signing Date:16.10.2025
11:09:42
Prosecution witnesses, which he failed to avail.
33. On several occasions, the Petitioner was advised to engage a counsel.
A written Notice dated 30.04.2024 was also given to him to defend the case
through a lawyer at his cost or to approach the Delhi Legal Services
Authority, Saket, to engage a counsel free of cost, in case he was not in a
position to engage a counsel.
34. During the course of Externment proceedings under Section 47 of the
Delhi Police Act, the Petitioner also got involved in another FIR No.
25/2024 dated 12.01.2024 under Section 188 IPC , registered at Police
Station Lodhi Colony where the Petitioner was booked for not getting the
police verification done of his tenant. He was fined by the learned JMFC,
on 11.03.2024.
35. Supplementary Notice under Section 50 of Delhi Polic Act, 1978
dated 22.04.2025, was issued to him and he was directed to file the written
Reply, but he did not do so. Several opportunities were given to the
Petitioner to produce his defence witnesses but he stated that he has no
witnesses in his defence.
36. The Petitioner addressed his arguments in person and admitted his
previous involvements. He claimed that he was living peacefully and
normally and earning his livelihood. He prayed for an opportunity to reform
himself for leading a peaceful life and promised not to indulge in any
criminal activities in future and to maintain peace in society.
37. After hearing arguments and going through the records, the learned
Additional DCP, in view of the evidence, the criminal record of the
Petitioner, his activities, testimony of the Prosecution witnesses, in-camera
statements and other evidence led during the proceedings, concluded that he
Signature Not Verified
W.P.(CRL) 2349/2025 Page 10 of 22
Signed By:VIKAS
ARORA
Signing Date:16.10.2025
11:09:42
was a criminal who is not likely to reform his way of life till stringent
measures are taken against him and his activities in the area of NCT of
Delhi are calculated to cause harm, danger and alarm to the respectable
citizens. Moreover, unless he is weaned from his present Company, he is
not likely to reform himself and his continuous presence in the area leads to
alarm and danger and is a constant source of tension and disturbance in the
minds of law-abiding citizens of the area. The offences committed by him
are of dangerous nature and the in-camera statements of the witnesses,
which have been placed on record, indicate that these witnesses were
unwilling to testify against him. He is also the Bad Character (B.C.) of
Bundle-A of Police Station Lodhi Colony, Delhi.
38. Considering all the evidence, the Order of Externment for a period of
12 months, was made under Section 47 of Delhi Police Act, by the learned
Additional DCP.
39. The Appeal preferred before the Hon‟ble Lieutenant Governor of
Delhi, against the Order of Externment, stands dismissed. During the
pendency of the proceedings before the Hon‟ble Lieutenant Governor of
Delhi, the Petitioner had approached this Court for interim relief since his
son was admitted in the Hospital. It is submitted that there is no merit in the
present Petition, which is liable to be dismissed.
Submissions heard and the record perused.
40. The Petitioner has challenged the Externment Order dated
24.05.2025 upheld by the Hon‟ble Lieutenant Governor of Delhi vide Order
dated 15.07.2024, on various grounds, namely, that the impugned Order
lacks clear and cogent material justifying any imminent threat to public
safety merely on the basis of stale FIRs, and also that principles of natural
Signature Not Verified
W.P.(CRL) 2349/2025 Page 11 of 22
Signed By:VIKAS
ARORA
Signing Date:16.10.2025
11:09:42
justice have not been followed insomuch as no opportunity was given to
participate effectively in the proceedings or to be represented through a
legal counsel.
41. Before adverting to the merits of the Case, it is pertinent to observe
that the scope of judicial review by a Writ Court of a quasi-judicial Orders,
is limited, as explained by the Apex Court in the case of State of NCT of
Delhi vs. Sanjeev alias Bittoo, (2005) 5 SCC 181. It was noted that an Order
made in exercise of power whether legislative or administrative , can be set-
aside only if there is manifest error in the exercise of such power or it is
manifestly arbitrary. These principles can be grouped in two categories,
namely, (i ) failure to exercise a discretion and (ii) excess or abuse of
discretionary power, which both are not mutually exclusive. However, the
Courts must be slow to interfere in the administrative functions unless the
decision is tainted by the aforesaid vulnerabilities.
42. The most significant principle to consider for the valid exercise of
discretion is „Reasonableness‟ , which implies that the person must have
drawn his attention to all the pertinent aspects, which he is bound to
consider, which are relevant and also must excludes such factors, which are
irrelevant.
43. The other aspect of discretion has been explained by Lord Diplock in
CCSU Case, (1984) 3 All ER 935, which are the principles of „ illegality‟,
„procedural impropriety‟ and „irrationality‟ . „Irrationality, which is another
aspect of due exercise of discretion, has been termed as „ Wednesbury
reasonableness‟, means a decision which is so outrageous in its defiance of
logic or of accepted moral standards that no reasonable person, who has
applied his mind to the question, could have arrived at.
Signature Not Verified
W.P.(CRL) 2349/2025 Page 12 of 22
Signed By:VIKAS
ARORA
Signing Date:16.10.2025
11:09:42
44. Similar principles have been noted by the Apex Court in the Case of
Union of India vs. G. Ganayutham, (1997) 7 SCC 463 wherein it was held
that the Judicial Review is confined not only to the decision itself, but also
any infirmity, which may lie in the decision making process.
45. With these observations, the present Order of Externment under
Section 47 of the Delhi Police Act, made against the Petitioner, may be
considered.
46. The Externment Order is not a judicial adjudication of an offence
committed by an individual, but it lies in the realm of law and Order in the
context of escalation of crime, wherein restrictions are clamped on an
individual, which in normal times may appear unreasonable. The
Externment Order is an extraordinary measure limiting and restricting the
movement of an individual and such Orders must not be made in a
mechanical manner. The consequences of such Order can not only prevent a
person from staying in his house along with his family members during
such period, but may also results in deprivation of his right to livelihood.
Recourse to this Section must be made only as an extraordinary measure in
case the circumstances so merit, as has been held in the Case of Deepak vs.
State of Maharashtra , 2022 SCC OnLine SC 1999.
47. The main observations in the Externment Order to reach the
conclusion that the Petitioner is a desperate and dangerous person, are as
under:
“Keeping in view the evidence brought on file, i.e.
notice, record of his criminal activities, prosecution
witnesses, in-camera statements and other evidence
adduced during the course of proceedings, I have no
Signature Not Verified
W.P.(CRL) 2349/2025 Page 13 of 22
Signed By:VIKAS
ARORA
Signing Date:16.10.2025
11:09:42
hesitation in concluding that he is a criminal who is not
likely to reform his way of life till stringent measures are
taken against him and his activities in the area of NCT of
Delhi are calculated to cause harm, danger and alarm to
the respectable citizens. Moreover, unless he is weaned
of his present company, he is not likely to reform himself
and start a normal life, his continuous presence in the
area leads to alarm and danger, constant source of
tension and disturbance in the minds of law-abiding
citizens of the area who have the right to lead a peaceful
life. In my opinion this case is well within the scope of
Section 47 of the Delhi Police Act, 1978 and he is a fit
person to be externed from the limits of the NCT of
Delhi.”
48. Section 47 of the Delhi Police Act, reads as under:-
“47. Removal of persons about to commit offences-
Whenever it appears to the Commissioner of Police-
(a) that the movements or acts of any person are
causing or are calculated to cause alarm, danger
of harm to person of 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, Chapter XVL, Chapter XVII or
Chapter XXII of the Indian Penal Code (45 of
Signature Not Verified
W.P.(CRL) 2349/2025 Page 14 of 22
Signed By:VIKAS
ARORA
Signing Date:16.10.2025
11:09:42
1860) or under Section 290 or Sections 489A to
489E (both inclusive) of that Code or in the
abetment of any such offence: or
(c) that such person-
(i) is so desperate and dangerous as to render
his being at large in Delhi or in any part
thereof hazardous to the community; or
(ii) has been found habitually intimidating
other persons by acts of violence or by
show of force; or
(iii) habitually commits affray or breach of
peace of riot, or habitually makes forcible
collection of subscription or threatens
people for illegal pecuniary gain for himself
or for others; or
(iv) has been habitually passing indecent
remarks on women and girls, or teasing
them by overtures,
and that in the opinion of the Commissioner of Polic
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, the Commissioner of Police may, by
order in writing duly served on such person, or by beat
of drum or otherwise as he thinks fit, direct such person
to so conduct himself as shall seem necessary in order to
Signature Not Verified
W.P.(CRL) 2349/2025 Page 15 of 22
Signed By:VIKAS
ARORA
Signing Date:16.10.2025
11:09:42
prevent violence and alarms or to remove himself
outside Delhi or any part thereof, by such route and
within such time as the Commissioner of Police may
specify and not to enter or return to Delhi or part
thereof, as the case may be, from which he was directed
to remove himself.
Explanation- A person who during a period within
one year immediately preceding the commencement of
an action under this Section has been found on not less
than three occasions to have committed or to have been
involved in any of the acts referred to in this Section
shall be deemed to have habitually committed that act.”
49. The aforesaid Section defines the circumstances in which an
Order of Externment may be made, which are as under:-
(i) that the movement or th e· acts of any person is
calculated to cause alarm, danger or harm to person or
property; or
(ii) that there are reasonable grounds that he would be
engaged in the commission of an offence; or
(iii) that he so desperate and dangerous that his being at
large would be hazardous to the community; or
(iv) th at he is found habitually intimidating to other persons
or is habitually committing affray or breach of peace; or
is habitually passing indecent rema r ks on women.
50. The facts of the present Case and the evidence led therein, may now
be considered if any of these grounds are established justifying the
impugned Order.
51. The entire case of the Respondent rests on the 11 FIRs that had been
Signature Not Verified
W.P.(CRL) 2349/2025 Page 16 of 22
Signed By:VIKAS
ARORA
Signing Date:16.10.2025
11:09:42
registered against the Petitioner, which are as under:
S.No. FIR No. Under Section Police Station Status
1. 192/2000 354 IPC Lodhi Colony Acquitted
2. 511/2001 61/1/14 Excise
Lodhi Colony Acquitted
Act
3. 69/2004 61/1/14 Excise
K.M. Pur Acquitted
Act
4. 339/2004 25 Arms Act K.M. Pur Acquitted
5. 33/2006 308/323/24 IPC Lodhi Colony Acquitted
6. 186/2006 363/364-
Lodhi Colony Acquitted
A/384/34 IPC
7. 365/2014 323/341/506/34
Lodhi Colony Acquitted
IPC
8. 141/2018 12/9/55
Lodhi Colony The
Gambling Act
Petitioner
appeared
without any
legal aid an
was advised
to deposit the
fine of
Rs.500/-.
52. The perusal of the list of the cases, shows that one Case of 354 IPC
was registered in 2000 and two Cases of Section 61/1/14 of Excise Act in
Signature Not Verified
W.P.(CRL) 2349/2025 Page 17 of 22
Signed By:VIKAS
ARORA
Signing Date:16.10.2025
11:09:42
the year 2001 and 2004; another Case of 25 Arms Act was registered in the
year 2004. Thereafter, it was in the year 2006 that two Cases under Section
363/364-A/384/34 of IPC, were registered.
53. Thereafter, the next FIR got registered in the year 2014 under Section
323/341/506/34 IPC. After a gap of four years, one case of gambling under
Section 12/9/55 of Gambling Act, was registered in the year 2018, in which
he pleaded guilty and deposited a fine of Rs.500/-.
54. Thereafter, there was a lull period for five years till 2023 when an
FIR under Section 324 and another FIR under Section 25 of the Arms Act,
got registered. The Petitioner stands acquitted in all the cases that were
registered till the year 2014.
55. It is interesting to note that there were two Cases registered in the
year 2004, followed by two Cases in 2006 and thereafter, one Case in 2014
and then one Case in 2018. Some of the offences are under the Excise Act
and Gambling Act. It is significant to observe the gap between the years
during which, the offences have allegedly have been committed and also
the nature of the offences for which, these FIRs were registered.
56. Pertinently, all the Cases have ended in acquittal and there is nothing
on record to show that the acquittal were on account of any threat to the
witness or for any act attributable to the Petitioner. There has to be proper
evidentiary material from where a satisfaction could be drawn that any of
Clauses as mentioned in Section 47 of the Delhi Police Act, 1978, are
established leading to an inference of apprehension regarding the safety and
property of the persons living therein the area.
57. The two witnesses, namely, PW-1, Inspector Rajesh Kumar, SHO,
Police Station Lodhi Colony and Head Constable, Rinku No. 319/SD,
Signature Not Verified
W.P.(CRL) 2349/2025 Page 18 of 22
Signed By:VIKAS
ARORA
Signing Date:16.10.2025
11:09:42
MHC(R) of Police Station Lodhi Colony, have been examined and the only
evidence which has been brought on record, are the list of Criminal Cases
that have been registered over a period of 18 years against him. Merely
because some Cases got registered against the Petitioner, would not suffice
or justify the issuance of the Externment Order.
58. No evidence has been produced to show that he is a person so
desperate or dangerous that he is hazardous to the community if allowed to
be at large, or is engaged in commission of an offence , or that his
movements or acts are calculated to cause alarm, danger or harm to the
person or property . Moreover, merely from the list of Cases, it cannot be
concluded that he is habituated to intimidate or commit affray or breach of
peace or of passing indecent remarks on the women.
59. Term „ Habitual ‟ has been explained in Explanation 2 of Section 47
of the Delhi Police Act, 1978, which reads as under:-
“Explanation: A person who during a period within one
year immediately preceding the commencement of an action
under this Section has been found on not less than three
occasions to have committed or to have been invoked in any of
the acts referred to in this Section shall be deemed to have
habitually committed that act.”
60. From the very definition of the word „ habitual ,‟ it is evident that in
the year preceding to the commencement of an action, it must be found that
on not less than three occasions, the person had committed or was involved
in any of the acts referred to in this Section. Pertinently, as per the case of
the Respondent itself, there is no such incident reported in the last
preceding year. Pertinently, there is a reference to two FIRs, namely,
Signature Not Verified
W.P.(CRL) 2349/2025 Page 19 of 22
Signed By:VIKAS
ARORA
Signing Date:16.10.2025
11:09:42
195/2023 under Section 324/34 IPC registered at Police Station Lodhi
Colony and FIR No. 297/2023 under Section 25 of Arms Act registered at
Police Station Lodhi Colony.
61. The Respondent has vehemently contended that even in the year
2024 vide FIR No. 26/2024 under Section 188 IPC, Police Station Lodhi
Colony, was registered. However, it is not in dispute that it was only in
respect of the non-verification of the tenant inducted by the Petitioner in his
premises. It‟s a technical offence and in no way reflects the criminal
propensity of the Petitioner.
62. It is further noted in the Externment Order that the Applicant was a
Bad Character (B.C.) of Bundle- A of Police Station Lodhi Colony, Delhi.
However, this fact of he being a bad character was not mentioned in Notice
under Section 50 that was served upon him and has not been given any
opportunity to counter the same. Moreover, no details of the Order by
which he was declared a Bad Character or the circumstances in which he
was put in Bundle-A, has been explained. It is evident from the perusal of
the Impugned Order that this fact has been mentioned incidentally only to
make out a Case, where none exists. There is nothing on record to show
that he is indulging in continuous and persistent activities, which are
hazardous to the society.
63. In the case of Prem Chand vs. Union of India, 1981 (1) SCC 639, it
has been held that mere apprehension of the Respondent, is not sufficient,
there must be a clear and present danger based upon credible material,
which shows that the movements and the acts of the Petitioner, are alarming
or dangerous or fraught with violence. Likewise, there must be sufficient
reason to believe that the person proceeded against, is so desperate and
Signature Not Verified
W.P.(CRL) 2349/2025 Page 20 of 22
Signed By:VIKAS
ARORA
Signing Date:16.10.2025
11:09:42
dangerous that his mere presence in the locality would be hazardous to the
society and its safety.
64. Much has been argued on behalf of the Respondent that there are two
Statements recorded of the persons, which have been put in the sealed
cover, to show the kind of threats that are being extended by the Petitioner.
Significantly, in the Order Sheet, there is no mention whatsoever of the
Statements of the witnesses having been recorded and kept in a sealed
cover. It finds mention only in the Impugned Order, which creates a doubt
about their genuineness and they being procured by the Respondents only to
justify their acts.
65. Furthermore, two witnesses in their Statements, have merely stated
that there are continuous threats being extended by the Petitioner to them
and creating an atmosphere of fear. However, on what basis, in what
circumstances and by what acts, such threats are being extended, are
significantly missing. Merely making bald assertions not supported by any
specific, cannot be considered as any kind of cogent evidence.
66. It is also pertinent to refer to the submissions of the Petitioner that
since 2018. He stands rehabilitated and and is settled with his wife and
children. He has been working in a Firm namely New Concept Services
since 2018, which is corroborated by his Form-16 issued by the Firm.
67. It has been rightly stated by the Petitioner that such Order of
Externment which has no basis, only leads to deprivation of his right to
livelihood and prevents him from taking care of his wife and children for
whom, he is the sole source of income. The Orders of Externment needs to
be made with some responsibility, to address the objective with which
Section 47 of the Delhi Police Act, has been inserted. While it cannot be
Signature Not Verified
W.P.(CRL) 2349/2025 Page 21 of 22
Signed By:VIKAS
ARORA
Signing Date:16.10.2025
11:09:42
overlooked that an onerous task of maintaining law and order and peace in
Society, rests on the Police, but at the same time, it cannot be used to
deprive persons of their liberty and right to livelihood, on the grounds
which are totally unsubstantiated.
68. While concluding, it may be noted that the Impugned Order of the
Externment is a mechanical Order, which merely reproduces the language
of the Section and is not supported by evidence of any kind. It is clearly an
Order, which does not establish the circumstances as detailed in Section 47
of the Delhi Police Act, which would merit the Externment of the
Petitioner.
69. The Petition is, therefore, allowed and the Externment Order dated
24.05.2025 is hereby, quashed. The next date of hearing stands cancelled.
70. The Petition is accordingly disposed of, along with pending
Application(s), if any.
(NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA)
JUDGE
OCTOBER 10, 2025/RS
Signature Not Verified
W.P.(CRL) 2349/2025 Page 22 of 22
Signed By:VIKAS
ARORA
Signing Date:16.10.2025
11:09:42