Externment order cannot be used to deprive individual's liberty: Delhi HC

New Delhi, Oct 21 (PTI) The Delhi High Court has held that an externment order, restricting the movement of an individual, cannot be used to deprive people of their liberty and right to livelihood on totally unsubstantiated grounds.

Justice Neena Bansal Krishna observed that 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".

"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 judge said in an order passed on October 10.

The judge made the observation, while adding that an 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 court said 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 judge made the observation on an application by a man challenging an order of the Lieutenant Governor of Delhi upholding an externment order passed against him by Delhi Police.

The application claimed that the applicant 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 a fine of Rs 500.

The application challenged the externment order on grounds of lack of proper evidence, procedural irregularities, and violation of natural justice.

He claimed 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.

The police opposed the application claiming that the applicant was a dangerous criminal involved in various offences over 18 years, posing threat to public safety.

The judge, however, noted in the order that all the cases registered against the applicant 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.

Merely because some cases got registered against the man would not suffice or justify the issuance of the externment order, the judge said.

"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," the judge said. PTI UK ZMN