The Bombay High Court has set aside externment orders passed against Saeed Ahmad Abdul Wahid Chaudhary, Secretary of the Social Democratic Party of India (SDPI), holding that organising protests and dharnas against government decisions does not warrant externment under the Maharashtra Police Act.
Background of the Case
The petitioner, a political functionary of SDPI (a registered political party), faced externment under Section 56(1)(a) and (b) of the Maharashtra Police Act based on multiple FIRs, primarily under Section 188 IPC, for organising morchas, dharnas, and agitations opposing certain Union Government decisions without police permission.
The Deputy Commissioner of Police, Zone-6, Chembur issued the externment order on 03.12.2025, which was upheld by the Divisional Commissioner, Konkan Division on 27.03.2026. The petitioner challenged these orders, arguing mala fide action and violation of fundamental rights.
Key Issues
- Whether mere organisation of protests constitutes “movements or acts causing alarm, danger or harm” under Section 56(1)(a).
- Sufficiency of material for subjective satisfaction of authorities to justify externment.
- Impact on fundamental rights under Articles 19 and 21 of the Constitution.
Bombay High Court’s Ruling
Justice Madhav J. Jamdar delivered the judgment on 02 July 2026.
The Court held:
- No material on record showed that the petitioner’s acts caused alarm, danger, or harm to persons or property. FIRs related only to organising protests without permission, punishable under Section 188 IPC (maximum one month simple imprisonment).
- Subjective satisfaction recorded by authorities was vitiated, as it lacked supporting material and appeared mala fide, targeting political opposition.
- Externment is an extraordinary measure that deprives a citizen of the fundamental right to free movement. It cannot be used to suppress legitimate expression of opinion or democratic rights.
- Reliance placed on Supreme Court’s ruling in Anuradha Bhasin v. Union of India and Gujarat High Court precedent in a similar protest-related externment case.
The impugned externment orders were quashed and set aside.
Key Takeaways
- Political Dissent Protected: Organising protests against government policies, even without permission, does not justify externment unless clear evidence of harm or violence exists.
- Section 56 Maharashtra Police Act: Requires strong material for subjective satisfaction; vague apprehensions insufficient.
- Fundamental Rights: Externment orders must withstand scrutiny under Articles 19 (freedom of speech/expression) and 21 (right to live with dignity).
- Mala Fide Actions: Courts will intervene where externment appears targeted at political activity.
Case Details
Case Name: Saeed Ahmad Abdul Wahid Chaudhary v. The State of Maharashtra & Anr. Citation: Writ Petition No. 1700 of 2026
Court: Bombay High Court (Criminal Appellate Jurisdiction)
Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Madhav J. Jamdar
Date of Judgment: 02 July 2026
Click HERE for full Judgment.
Lawcutor 