Externment Of Gang Member Under Police Act Requires Satisfaction About Gang's Activities, Not Individual Alone: Bombay High Court
The Bombay High Court has held that the "subjective satisfaction" required for passing an externment order under Section 55 of the Maharashtra Police Act, 1951 against a gang or body of persons is fundamentally different from the satisfaction required under Section 56 for externment of an individual. The Court observed that while Section 55 requires the authority to be satisfied about...
The Bombay High Court has held that the "subjective satisfaction" required for passing an externment order under Section 55 of the Maharashtra Police Act, 1951 against a gang or body of persons is fundamentally different from the satisfaction required under Section 56 for externment of an individual. The Court observed that while Section 55 requires the authority to be satisfied about the activities of the gang or body of persons as a whole, Section 56 is concerned with the conduct and activities of the individual sought to be externed.
Justice Madhav J. Jamdar was hearing a writ petition challenging an externment order passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Police, Mumbai, and the appellate order of the Divisional Commissioner, Konkan Division, affirming it. The petitioner, who was alleged to be a member of a gang, had four criminal cases registered against him. The State argued that the power under Section 55 had been validly invoked, considering that the gang was involved in as many as 31 criminal cases and that one case against the petitioner under Sections 302 and 307 of the IPC, along with provisions of the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act, 1999, remained pending.
The Court held that the statutory requirements under Sections 55 and 56 operate in distinct fields. It explained that under Section 55, the competent authority must record its subjective satisfaction that the movement or encampment of a gang or body of persons is causing, or is likely to cause, danger, alarm or reasonable suspicion of unlawful designs.
In contrast, Section 56 requires satisfaction regarding the movements or acts of the individual person sought to be externed, including whether such person is causing danger or is engaged in offences involving force, violence or specified offences under the Indian Penal Code. The Bench observed that these two standards of satisfaction are "totally different" and cannot be conflated.
Applying these principles, the Court noted that the petitioner was admittedly alleged to be a member of a gang against which 31 criminal cases had been registered. It further observed that, apart from the overall activities of the gang, there was sufficient material against the petitioner, including his involvement in a pending prosecution under Sections 302 and 307 IPC read with the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act.
The Court held that, for the purposes of Section 55, the relevant subjective satisfaction related to the activities of the gang of which the petitioner was a member and found that such satisfaction had been properly recorded.
Accordingly, the Court dismissed the writ petition, declining to interfere with the externment order.
Case Title: Vignesh Ramesh Kamble v. State of Maharashtra & Ors. [Criminal Writ Petition No. 3614 of 2026]