Bombay High Court Strikes Down Externment Order, Labels Party-Switching 'Horse Trading'
The Bombay High Court on Thursday quashed a police externment order against a political activist, ruling that peaceful protests against government policies do not justify such action under the Maharashtra Police Act. The court also made oral observations on the practice of legislators changing party affiliations, terming it 'horse trading'.
Justice Madhav Jamdar disposed of a petition filed by Saeed Ahmad Abdul Wahid Chaudhary, general secretary of the Socialist Democratic Party of India (SDPI). Chaudhary had challenged two externment orders issued by the Deputy Commissioner of Police (Zone 6) and the Divisional Commissioner, Konkan Division, on December 3, 2025, and March 27, 2026, respectively. The court quashed both orders and cancelled the one-year externment period.
In its ruling, the court noted that Chaudhary had organised morchas and dharnas against certain decisions of the Union government. Justice Jamdar observed that these activities cannot be grounds for externment under the Maharashtra Police Act, describing the action as 'mala fide' and violative of the petitioner's fundamental rights under Articles 19 (freedom of speech and expression) and 21 (right to life and personal liberty) of the Constitution. The order stated that citizens have the right to express their opinions and live with dignity.
During the hearing, the judge made oral observations on the political situation in Maharashtra, referring to instances of Members of Parliament and Members of Legislative Assembly switching parties. The court noted that a political leader might be able to close criminal cases against themselves by joining what the judge described as a 'washing machine', in an apparent reference to the ruling party. The court also remarked that the state assembly had been discussing the election of a Presiding Officer and his shift from one party to another.
Citing Supreme Court judgments, the bench emphasised that dissent is a 'symbol of a vibrant democracy'. The judge further commented on the tendency to curb protests, stating that citizens were being treated as 'slaves of the Indian Government'. These remarks were made in the context of the court's disapproval of restrictions on public dissent. With these findings, the court disposed of the plea and set aside the externment orders.
