BHAGUBHAI. DULLABHABHAI BHANDARI versus THE DISTRLCT MAGISTRATE, THANA & OTHERS

BHAGUBHAI. DULLABHABHAI BHANDARI versus THE DISTRLCT MAGISTRATE, THANA & OTHERS

Section 56 of the Bombay Police Act, 1951, as applied in these cases, is constitutional and does not violate Article 19 of the Constitution. The provision is reasonable as it is aimed at public safety, applies proper procedure, and the restrictions imposed by externment can be avoided by seeking prescribed permissions. The term 'witness' in the section is not limited and includes police and customs officers if they are unwilling to give evidence due to apprehended danger or harm.

Parties
Petitioner: Bhagubhai Dullabhabhai Bhandari; Petitioner: Kunwar Rameshwar Singh; Respondent: The District Magistrate, Thana; Respondent: Deputy Superintendent of Police and Sub-Divisional Police Officer, Bhiwandi Division, Bhiwandi, District Thana; Respondent: State of Bombay; Respondent: Shri W. K. Patil, Deputy Commissioner of Police, Crime Branch (I) C.I.D., Greater Bombay; Respondent: Commissioner of Police, Greater Bombay
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
08 May 1956
Procedural Posture
Petition Under Article 32 of the Constitution of India / Supreme Court Original Jurisdiction, Final Judgment
Outcome
Petitions dismissed
Legal Topics
Externment Order, Fundamental Rights, Reasonableness of Restriction, Article 19 of Constitution, Validity of Police Powers
Constitutional Law Criminal Law Administrative Law Externment Order Fundamental Rights Reasonableness of Restriction Article 19 of Constitution Validity of Police Powers

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Bhagubhai Dullabhabhai Bhandari

Petitioner

Kunwar Rameshwar Singh

Petitioner

The District Magistrate, Thana

Respondent

Deputy Superintendent of Police and Sub-Divisional Police Officer, Bhiwandi Division, Bhiwandi, District Thana

Respondent

State of Bombay

Respondent

Shri W. K. Patil, Deputy Commissioner of Police, Crime Branch (I) C.I.D., Greater Bombay

Respondent

Commissioner of Police, Greater Bombay

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Petition Under Article 32 of the Constitution of India / Supreme Court Original Jurisdiction, Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether section 56 of the Bombay Police Act, 1951 is unconstitutional as contravening Article 19 of the Constitution
  2. 2 Whether the restriction imposed by externment orders is unreasonable
  3. 3 Whether the term 'witness' under section 56 includes police or customs officers

Ratio Decidendi

Section 56 of the Bombay Police Act, 1951, as applied in these cases, is constitutional and does not violate Article 19 of the Constitution. The provision is reasonable as it is aimed at public safety, applies proper procedure, and the restrictions imposed by externment can be avoided by seeking prescribed permissions. The term 'witness' in the section is not limited and includes police and customs officers if they are unwilling to give evidence due to apprehended danger or harm.

Court Disposition

Petitions dismissed

Orders

  • Section 56 of the Bombay Police Act, 1951, is not unconstitutional.
  • Externment orders passed against the petitioners are not invalid.