Supreme Court: Vacancies From Resignations under CUSAT Act Must Follow Communal Rotation  ||  Supreme Court: Forest Land Cannot Be Leased or Used For Agriculture Without Centre’s Approval  ||  Supreme Court: Gravity of Offence and Accused’s Role Must Guide Suspension of Sentence under CrPC  ||  Supreme Court: Arbitral Awards Cannot be Set Aside For Mere Legal Errors or Misreading of Evidence  ||  SC Acknowledges Child Trafficking as a Grave Reality and Issues Guidelines to Assess Victim Evidence  ||  Allahabad HC: When Parties Extend an Agreement by Conduct, The Arbitration Clause Extends Too  ||  Supreme Court: Issues of Party Capacity and Maintainability Must Be Decided by Arbitral Tribunal  ||  Supreme Court: Omissions in Chief Examination Can Be Rectified During Cross-Examination  ||  Supreme Court: Items Given by Accused to Police Are Not Section 27 Recoveries under Evidence Act  ||  Gujarat High Court: Waqf Institutions Must Pay Court Fees When Filing Disputes in State Tribunal    

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