Externment Order Can't Curtail Liberty Or Livelihood On Unsubstantiated Grounds: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has observed that an externment order cannot be used to deprive an individual of his or her liberty and right to livelihood, on the grounds which are totally unsubstantiated.Justice Neena Bansal Krishna said that Externment Order is not a judicial adjudication of an offence committed by an individual, but it lies in the realm of law and order in the context of escalation of crime, wherein restrictions are clamped on an individual, which in normal times may appear unreasonable. “The Externment Order is an extraordinary measure limiting and restricting the movement of an individual and such Orders must not be made in a mechanical manner,” the Court said. It added that the consequences of such an order can not only prevent a person from staying in his house along with his family members during such period, but may also results in deprivation of his right to livelihood.The Court was dealing with a plea filed by a man challenging an order of the Lieutenant Governor of Delhi upholding the Externment Order passed against him by the Delhi Police. He had faced trial in eight criminal cases till 2021 and was acquitted in all the cases, except in one in which he pleaded guilty and deposited fine of Rs.500. It was his case that he has been living peacefully and employed as an event supervisor since 2018 but has faced hostility from local criminals and some police officials due to his role as a police informer.He challenged the externment order on grounds of lack of proper evidence, procedural irregularities, and violation of natural justice. On the other hand, the police claimed that he was a dangerous criminal involved in various offences over 18 years, posing threat to public safety.Quashing the externment order, Justice Krishna noted that all the cases registered against the man ended in acquittal and there was nothing on record to show that the acquittal were on account of any threat to the witness or for any act attributable to him.The Court ruled that merely” because some Cases got registered against the man would not suffice or justify the issuance of the Externment Order.“No evidence has been produced to show that he is a person so desperate or dangerous that he is hazardous to the community if allowed to be at large, or is engaged in commission of an offence, or that his movements or acts are calculated to cause alarm, danger or harm to the person or property. Moreover, merely from the list of Cases, it cannot be concluded that he is habituated to intimidate or commit affray or breach of peace or of passing indecent remarks on the women,” the Court said. It added there was nothing on record to show that the man was indulging in continuous and persistent activities which were hazardous to the society. It further said that merely making bald assertions not supported by any specific cannot be considered as any kind of cogent evidence.“While it cannot be overlooked that an onerous task of maintaining law and order and peace in Society, rests on the Police, but at the same time, it cannot be used to deprive persons of their liberty and right to livelihood, on the grounds which are totally unsubstantiated,” the Court said. It added: “While concluding, it may be noted that the Impugned Order of the Externment is a mechanical Order, which merely reproduces the language of the Section and is not supported by evidence of any kind. It is clearly an Order, which does not establish the circumstances as detailed in Section 47 of the Delhi Police Act, which would merit the Externment of the Petitioner.”Title: MAHESH SHRIVASTVA @ JEEVA v. STATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI)Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1332Click here to read order

Externment Order Can't Curtail Liberty Or Livelihood On Unsubstantiated Grounds: Delhi High Court

Nupur Thapliyal

Tags