Calling the Situation Grim, the Supreme Court Takes Suo Motu Cognizance of Delays in NCLT Approvals  ||  Supreme Court: Admission of a Claim by a Resolution Professional is Not Debt Acknowledgment  ||  Supreme Court: Public Figures Must Exercise Caution as Their Words Have Consequences in Society  ||  SC: State Must Act as a Model Employer, Criticising the Union For Not Regularising ISRO Workers  ||  J&K&L High Court: Minor Minerals Have Major Environmental Impacts and Must be Regulated  ||  Del HC: Unexplained Money Received by Public Servant is Not Bribery Without Proof of Official Favour  ||  Del HC: There is No Absolute Bar on Granting Co-Convicts Parole/Furlough Together in Suitable Cases  ||  Bom HC: LARR Authority Can Examine Limitation Issues in Land Acquisition References under 2013 Act  ||  MP HC: Long-Serving Employees Cannot Be Denied Regularisation by Retrospective Statutory Amendments  ||  J&K&L HC: Routine Challenges to Lok Adalat Awards Defeat Their Purpose of Quick Dispute Resolution    

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