The Bombay High Court on Thursday set aside a Mumbai Police directive requiring a political activist to depart the city. It ruled that holding marches or demonstrations against government policies alone does not warrant such measures. The court found that applying externment provisions under Maharashtra law on these grounds violated the person’s fundamental rights.
Justice Madhav Jamdar, considering a petition by 49-year-old Saeed Ahmad Abdul Wahid Chaudhary, general secretary of the Socialist Democratic Party of India, stated that peaceful demonstrations and chants opposing official policies cannot support an externment order under the Maharashtra Police Act.
Chaudhary, who lives in Chembur and has run for parliamentary seats, received a one-year ban from Mumbai and nearby areas following several FIRs filed against him from 2019 to 2024. The cases mostly involved protests over the Citizenship Amendment Act, National Register of Citizens, Gyanvapi mosque issue, Babri Masjid demolition, alleged Waqf Board irregularities, and fuel price increases.
His counsel, advocate Payoshi Roy, noted that five FIRs were registered, primarily for organizing protests against central government actions under Section 188 of the Indian Penal Code for disobeying public orders.
Justice Jamdar questioned during proceedings why chants like “BJP government murdabad” and “Amit Shah murdabad” justified an externment order from a Deputy Commissioner of Police. The judge remarked that police serve as public officials answerable to citizens rather than political figures.
The court emphasized citizens’ constitutional right to oppose government decisions and that authorities cannot expel residents from their city solely for joining protests or raising slogans.
Externment action against Chaudhary started with a show-cause notice on October 20, 2025, under the Maharashtra Police Act. In December 2025, the Deputy Commissioner of Police in Chembur imposed the 12-month ban from Mumbai and suburbs, claiming the FIRs showed his conduct caused fear and disrupted public order. The Divisional Commissioner of Konkan Division later confirmed the order.
Chaudhary challenged both decisions in the High Court, arguing the ban hindered his political activities in his constituency ahead of Mumbai civic elections. He also claimed preventive powers were misused to curb dissent via unsubstantiated allegations of creating a “kingdom of terror,” disputed by local residents and shopkeepers.
Justice Jamdar allowed the petition, ruling the externment order represented improper use of police authority. Participation in protests alone could not justify externment under the Maharashtra Police Act. The court annulled both the initial order and the appeal decision, noting they relied only on Chaudhary’s protest involvement and breached his rights under Articles 19 and 21 of the Constitution.
