The Bombay High Court has set aside an externment order passed against Saeed Ahmad Abdul Wahid Chaudhary, holding that merely organizing protests against government decisions and facing cases for alleged violation of prohibitory orders cannot, by itself, justify externment under the Maharashtra Police Act.
Justice Madhav J. Jamdar delivered the judgment on July 2, 2026, allowing the writ petition and quashing both the original externment order and the appellate order that had upheld it.
Background of the Case
Saeed Ahmad Abdul Wahid Chaudhary challenged an externment order dated December 3, 2025, issued by the Deputy Commissioner of Police, Zone-6, Chembur, Mumbai, along with the appellate order dated March 27, 2026, passed by the Divisional Commissioner, Konkan Division.
The petitioner argued that he was the Secretary of the Social Democratic Party of India (SDPI) and had organized protests, marches and demonstrations against certain decisions of the Union Government. According to him, the criminal cases relied upon by the authorities were primarily for alleged offences under Section 188 of the Indian Penal Code, relating to disobedience of public orders, and did not justify such a severe preventive action.
Take CourtBook Everywhere
Access your account on the go with our mobile app.
Court's Observations
The High Court examined Section 56 of the Maharashtra Police Act, which permits externment only where a person's activities are causing, or are likely to cause, alarm, danger or harm, or where there are reasonable grounds to believe the person is involved in serious offences involving force, violence or specified chapters of the Penal Code.
The Court found no material to support the authorities' conclusion that the petitioner's activities created such danger. It noted that the allegations in the FIRs were limited to organizing protests, raising slogans and conducting demonstrations without police permission.
"The subjective satisfaction recorded by the authorities... is without any material to support the same. Thus, the subjective satisfaction is vitiated," the Court observed.
Justice Jamdar further emphasized that an externment order is an extraordinary measure because it restricts a citizen's fundamental right to move freely. The Court also observed that externing a person merely for opposing government decisions affects the constitutional rights to freedom of speech and expression and to live with dignity under Articles 19 and 21 of the Constitution.
Referring to earlier decisions of the Supreme Court and the Gujarat High Court, the bench reiterated that democratic dissent cannot be suppressed through preventive measures like externment.
Decision
Allowing the writ petition, the Bombay High Court quashed the externment order dated December 3, 2025, issued by the Deputy Commissioner of Police, Zone-6, Chembur, Mumbai, as well as the appellate order dated March 27, 2026, passed by the Divisional Commissioner, Konkan Division.
Case Details:
Case Title: Saeed Ahmad Abdul Wahid Chaudhary vs State of Maharashtra & Another
Case Number: Writ Petition No. 1700 of 2026
Judge: Justice Madhav J. Jamdar
Decision Date: July 2, 2026
