Calcutta HC: Award May Be Set Aside if Tribunal Rewrites Contract or Ignores Key Clauses  ||  Delhi HC Suspends Kuldeep Singh Sengar’s Life Term, Holding Section 5(C) of POCSO Not Made Out  ||  Calcutta High Court: Arbitration Clause in an Expired Lease Cannot be Invoked For a Fresh Lease  ||  Delhi High Court: 120-Day Timeline under Section 132B Of Income Tax Act is Not Mandatory  ||  NCLAT Reaffirms That Borrower's Debt Acknowledgment Also Extends Limitation Period for Guarantors  ||  NCLAT: Oppression & Mismanagement Petition Cannot Be Filed Without Company Membership on Filing Date  ||  Supreme Court Quashes Rajasthan Village Renaming, Says Government Must Follow its Own Policy  ||  NCLAT: NCLT Can Order Forensic Audit on its Own, No Separate Application Required  ||  NCLAT Reiterates That IBC Cannot be Invoked as a Recovery Tool for Contractual Disputes  ||  Delhi HC: DRI or Central Revenues Control Lab Presence in Delhi Alone Does Not Confer Jurisdiction    

Sachin Yeswant Pokre and anr. v. State of Maharashtra and ors. - (High Court of Bombay) (14 Jun 2016)

No automatic grant of interim stay in appeal against externment

Criminal

Courts cannot grant interim stay in instances of appeal against an externment order under the Bombay Police Act 1951 as a matter of policy, a full bench of the Bombay High Court held.

The court was faced with the question, whether after an order of externment had been passed under the Bombay Police Act 1951, an order granting interim stay of the order should be passed by a court as matter of course.

The Petitioners submitted that externment, exclusion from a certain city or district, was a “drastic order”, one applied for a limited duration. However, since appeals against the order could not be heard for several months, stay on the should be granted in the interim.

An earlier Division Bench order had interpreted interim stay under the Act as a matter of course, as failure to do so would render the appeal infructuous.

The Full Bench of the High Court disagreed with the above ruling. It ruled that “discretion vested in the Appellate Authority must be exercised not blindly as a matter of policy”. An appellate authority would have to hear the application interim relief expeditiously and “apply its mind” as to whether the externment order is coloured in illegality.

Relevant : Shamkumar Arjun Dalvi v. State of Maharashtra and Anr. MANU/MH/0382/1987 Section 60 Bombay Police Act, 1951

Section 63AA Bombay Police Act, 1951

Tags : BOMBAY POLICE   EXTERNMENT   INTERIM STAY   APPEAL  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2025 - All Rights Reserved