His Conduct Is Too Dangerous For The People: Chhattisgarh High Court Upholds Externment Order Against 'Habitual Offender'

The Chhattisgarh High Court has upheld an externment order issued against a person by the District Magistrate observing that his presence has become extremely dangerous and his conduct is too dangerous for the people living in the locality.

The Court was considering a Writ-Petition seeking quashing of the externment order.

The division bench of Chief Justice Ramesh Sinha and Justice Arvind Kumar Verma observed, "....Due to its criminal activities, an atmosphere of panic and terror has been created in the city and ward. Petitioner’s free movement in the society and in the region has become extremely dangerous for maintaining peace and order in the region, thus we are of the opinion that the conduct of the petitioner is too dangerous for the people living in the locality...."

The Petitioner was represented by Advocate Pawan Kumar Kesharani while the Respondent was represented by Deputy Government Advocate S.S. Baghel.

Facts of the Case

An order under Section 3 and Section 5 (a)(b) of Chhattisgarh Rajya Suraksha Adhiniyam, 1990 was passed by the District Magistrate against the Petitioner whereby the Petitioner was ordered to go out of the border area of District Mahasamund and adjacent revenue Districts Raipur, Dhamtari, Gariaband, Balodabazar and Rairgarh District within 24 hours for a period of one year and as long as that order remains in effect without taking prior statutory permission the Petitioner should not enter into the area.

The Appeal filed by the Petitioner against the order was dismissed. Counsel for the Petitioner argued that the impugned order was passed mechanically without giving proper opportunity of hearing to the Petitioner. Furthermore, the Counsel contended that the cases cited do not accurately reflect the current state of his conduct or his contributions to society, particularly in the context of his political and social involvement. It was averred that there are no substantive charges levelled against him and the Appellate Authority's conclusion that there has been no improvement in the Petitioner's conduct is based on a misinterpretation of the facts and overlooks the Petitioner's consistent efforts towards social welfare and lawful conduct in recent years.

Reasoning By Court

The Court at the outset took note of the allegations that the Petitioner along with his associates has been continuously involved in hooliganism, fights, quarrels, abuses, assaults, deadly attacks, gets agitated on complaints against him and starts threatening while trying to create pressure at higher levels to hide his criminal activities and that it is due to his fear and terror of him, that the people of the area are not able to inform the Police about many crimes committed by him.

It also noted that 18 criminal cases were registered against the Petitioner from the year 1995 to 2023 and 08 Istgasas were registered from the year 1996 to 2018 and out of the 18 cases pending against him, he has been acquitted in 05 cases on the basis of mutual compromise/settlement, which shows that the aggrieved party has got the case resolved by compromising due to fear/pressure of the Petitioner and that preventive action was taken 08 times against him when there was no improvement in the criminal conduct

"Looking to the number of criminal activities registered under different Acts and prohibitory actions taken against the petitioner, which are increasing day by day and also looking to the conduct of the petitioner by which free movement in the society and in the region has become extremely dangerous for maintaining peace and order, we are of the opinion that the District Magistrate has followed the due procedure of law and has rightly passed the impugned order against the petitioner under Sections 5 and 6 of the Act of 1990," the Court observed.

The Petition was accordingly dismissed.

Cause Title: Dheeraj Sahu vs. State of Chhattisgarh Through (2025:CGHC:19819-DB)

Click here to read/ download Oder