NCLT: Suspended Directors Who are Prospective Resolution Applicants Cann’t Access Valuation Reports  ||  Supreme Court Clarifies Test For Granting Bail to Accused Added at Trial under Section 319 CrPC  ||  SC: Fresh Notification For Vijayawada ACB Police Station not Required After AP Bifurcation  ||  SC: Studying in a Government Institute Does Not Create an Automatic Right to a Government Job  ||  NCLT Mumbai: CIRP Claims Cannot Invoke the 12-Year Limitation Period For Enforcing Mortgage Rights  ||  NCLAT: Misnaming Guarantor as 'Director' in SARFAESI Notice Doesn't Void Guarantee Invocation  ||  Jharkhand HC: Mere Breach of Compromise Terms by an Accused Does Not Justify Bail Cancellation  ||  Cal HC: Banks Cannot Freeze a Company's Accounts Solely Due To ROC Labeling a 'Management Dispute'  ||  Rajasthan HC: Father’s Rape of His Daughter Transcends Ordinary Crime; Victim’s Testimony Suffices  ||  Delhi HC: Judge Who Reserved Judgment Must Deliver Verdict Despite Transfer; Successor Can't Rehear    

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 2026 - All Rights Reserved