THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH & ORS. versus DHARMENDRA RATHORE

Citation: [2019] 1 S.C.R. 707 · Decided: 29-01-2019 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: ASHOK BHUSHAN · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
707
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH & ORS.
v.
DHARMENDRA RATHORE
(Criminal Appeal No. 171 of  2019)
JANUARY 29, 2019
[ASHOK BHUSHAN AND K. M. JOSEPH, JJ.]
Madhya Pradesh Rajya Suraksha Adhiniyam, 1990:
ss. 3, 4, 5, 6, 13 and 18 – Power of externment – Competence
of Additional District Magistrate – Held: Scheme of the Adhiniyam
contemplates exercise of power of District Magistrate u/s. 3, 4, 5
and 6 by Additional District Magistrate or Sub-Divisional Magistrate
– Hence, Additional District Magistrate is competent to pass the
externment order.
Allowing the appeals, the Court
HELD: 1. In the Statutory Scheme of the Madhya Pradesh
Rajya Suraksha Adhiniyam, 1990, there is no provision, which
prohibits passing an order by an officer lower than the rank of
District Magistrate, rather under Section 13, there is no limitation
on the State Government while specially empowering an officer
of the State to exercise the power of District Magistrate under
Sections 3, 4, 5 and 6 and further under Section 18, the powers
and duties of District Magistrate can be directed to be exercised
or performed by Additional District Magistrate or Sub -Divisional
Magistrate for such areas as may be specified in the order.  Thus,
the Scheme of the Adhiniyam, 1990 clearly contemplate exercise
of the power of District Magistrate under Sections 3, 4, 5 and 6
by an Additional District Magistrate or Sub -Divisional Magistrate.
The Notification dated 05.03.2003 was not under challenge in
the writ petition. [Para 14][715-F-H]
Ajaib Singh v. Gurbachan Singh AIR 1965 SC 1619 :
[1965] SCR 845 – distinguished.
2. The period of externment being one year, which has
already expired, there is no useful purpose in considering the
other grounds. [Para 15][716-B]
[2019] 1 S.C.R. 707
707
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
708
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2019] 1 S.C.R.
Case Law Reference
[1965] SCR 845
distinguished
Para 4
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Criminal Appeal No.
171 of 2019.
From the Judgment and Order dated 20.06.2014 of the High Court
of M.P., Bench at Gwalior in WA No. 71 of 2014.
WITH
Crl. Appeal No. 172 of 2019.
Varun Chopra, AAG, Mrs. Swarupama Chaturvedi, B. N. Dubey,
Advs. for the Appellants.
Ms. Nidhi, Adv. for the Respondent.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
ASHOK BHUSHAN,J. 1. Leave granted.
2. These two appeals raising similar question of law has been
heard together and are being decided by this common judgment.  State
of Madhya Pradesh has filed the appeal questioning the judgment of
Division Bench of the High Court dated 30.10.2013 passed in Writ Appeal
No. 244 of 2013 and judgment of Division Bench in Writ Appeal No. 71
of 2014 dated 20.06.2014 following the earlier judgment dated 30.10.2013.
3. For deciding the appeals, it shall be sufficient to refer to the
facts in Criminal Appeal – The State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors. Vs.
Dharmendra Rathore.  The Additional District Magistrate, Gwalior has
passed an order dated 26.02.2013 externing the respondent for a period
of one year from the district concerned.  An appeal was filed by the
respondent against the order of the Additional District Magistrate before
the Commissioner, Gwalior Division, which too was dismissed on
17.06.2013.  A writ Petition No. 4818 of 2013 was filed by the respondent
challenging the order of the Additional District Magistrate as well as of
the Commissioner, Gwalior Division.  The main ground taken by the
respondent before the High Court was that the Additional District
Magistrate had no jurisdictionto pass the order under the Madhya
Pradesh Rajya Suraksha Adhiniyam, 1990 (hereinafter referred to as
“Adhiniyam, 1990”).  The order can be passed only by District
Magistrate.  Reliance was also placed on an order passed by another
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
709
learned Single Judge dated 30.05.2013 in Writ Petition No. 8555/2012 –
Arvind Sharma Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors. The High Court
relying on judgment of Arvind Sharma Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh &
Ors. allowed the writ petition holding that Additional District Magistrate
was incompetent to pass the order under the Adhiniyam, 1990.  Writ
Appeal was filed against the judgment of the High Court by the State of
Madhya Pradesh being Writ Appeal No. 71 of 2014. By judgment and
order dated 20.06.2014, the writ appeal has been dismissed by Division
Bench relying on its judgment in Writ Appeal No. 244 of 2013 dated
30.10.2013 – State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Arvind Sharma, in which
judgment, the High Court after considering the provisions
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.