'How can ‘BJP, Amit Shah murdabad’ slogans be grounds for externment?' Bombay HC questions police action

Bombay High Court scrutinises externment order over anti-BJP slogans

The Bombay High Court has raised questions over the legality of an externment order based on allegations that an individual raised slogans such as "BJP murdabad" and "Amit Shah murdabad", observing that such expressions alone may not justify preventive action under the law.

Hearing a petition challenging the externment order, the court asked the authorities how the slogan-shouting could, by itself, be treated as sufficient grounds to remove a person from a particular area. The bench indicated that the material placed before it did not immediately demonstrate how the alleged acts posed a threat to public order warranting externment. (hindustantimes.com)

Externment is a preventive measure that allows authorities to direct a person to leave a specified geographical area for a certain period if their presence is considered prejudicial to public order or safety. Such orders are generally subject to judicial review to ensure they comply with constitutional and statutory safeguards.

During the hearing, the High Court observed that merely raising slogans against a political party or a public figure does not automatically establish grounds for externment unless supported by evidence showing that the conduct threatened public peace or law and order.

The petitioner's counsel argued that the externment order violated the individual's fundamental rights and was based primarily on the alleged slogan-shouting rather than any concrete evidence of criminal conduct or disturbance to public order.

The state, on the other hand, defended the police action, contending that the externment order was passed after considering the overall circumstances and relevant material available to the authorities. The government maintained that the action was taken in accordance with the applicable legal provisions.

The High Court, however, indicated that it would closely examine whether the statutory requirements for passing an externment order had been satisfied in the present case. The bench's observations underscore the judiciary's emphasis on ensuring that preventive powers are exercised only in appropriate circumstances and with adequate justification.

The matter has been kept pending for further hearing, during which the court is expected to examine the records and hear additional submissions from both sides before passing its final order.