HUSSAIN ILYAS SUMBANIYA vs STATE OF MAHARASHTRA — WP/6088/2024
Case under Constitution of India Section 226,227. Disposed: Contested--Disposed Off on 07th May 2026.
CNR: HCBM010622562024
Filing Number
WP/26019/2024
Filing Date
13-Dec-2024
Registration No
WP/6088/2024
Registration Date
16-Dec-2024
Judge
Hon'ble Shri Justice N. J. Jamadar
Coram
Hon'ble Shri Justice N. J. Jamadar
Bench Type
Single
Category
CRIMINAL ( 9 )
Sub-Category
Seeking Directions ( 105 )
Judicial Branch
Criminal
Decision Date
07-May-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--Disposed Off
Last updated 13-Jun-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.HUSSAIN ILYAS SUMBANIYA
Adv. RAHUL TRIPATHI,RAMZANALI MALIK,RAMZANALI MALIK, ,N R MEHTA,RAMZANALI MALIK
Respondent(s)
-
1.STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
07-May-2026
Hon'ble Shri Justice N. J. JamadarView PDF
Case Summary: WP/6088/2024 The Bombay High Court quashed a two-year externment order against Hussain Ilyas Sumbaniya under the Maharashtra Police Act, 1951. The court found the externment order suffered from non-application of mind: several crimes considered were stale/time-barred, one case involved acquittal, NDPS offenses fell outside statutory scope, and critically, no concrete evidence showed witnesses feared giving testimony. The court emphasized externment requires strict adherence to legal prerequisites and cannot impose maximum two-year duration without recorded reasons based on objective material. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
29-Jan-2026
For Circulation
Hon'ble Shri Justice N. J. Jamadar
-
18-Dec-2025
Hon'ble Shri Justice N. J. JamadarView PDF
-
18-Dec-2025
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
13-Dec-2024
Case filed
Registration No. WP/6088/2024
Case Summary: WP/6088/2024 The Bombay High Court quashed a two-year externment order against Hussain Ilyas Sumbaniya under the Maharashtra Police Act, 1951. The court found the externment order suffered from non-application of mind: several crimes considered were stale/time-barred, one case involved acquittal, NDPS offenses fell outside statutory scope, and critically, no concrete evidence showed witnesses feared giving testimony. The court emphasized externment requires strict adherence to legal prerequisites and cannot impose maximum two-year duration without recorded reasons based on objective material. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts