PANJIM: The High Court of Bombay at Goa on Wednesday directed the appellate authority i.e. the Chief Secretary to dispose of appeals filed by Joan Mascarenhas e D’Souza and her husband Domnic D’Souza challenging their externment, as expeditiously as possible and in any case, latest by April 26.
Siolim-based Five Pillars Church Pastor Domnic D’Souza and wife Joan had filed criminal revisions petitions challenging the North Goa Collector’s order dated March 14, 2024 externing them from the jurisdiction of North Goa district for a period of six months, with immediate effect, under the provisions of the Goa Maintenance of Public Order and Safety Act, 1988.
The division bench comprising Justices Mahesh Sonak and Valmiki Menezes stated that the decision on the appeals must be communicated to the petitioners on or before April 26 and asked the public prosecutor S G Bhobe to inform the appellate authority of the order by Wednesday itself, so that there is no further delay in communication.
Both the petitioners had filed an appeal against the Collector’s order on March 21, 2024 before the appellate authority i.e. the Chief Secretary and had also prayed for interim relief in terms of the proviso to Section 7(3) of the said Act. The petitioners were heard on March 26 on the issue of interim relief but it was not decided by the appellate authority on the said date. Instead, time was granted to the respondents to file their replies and the matter was posted on April. 4.
Arguing on behalf of the petitioners, Senior Advocate Subhodh Kantak stated that the appellate authority had made it clear that on April 4 that both the appeals would be disposed of rather than spending any time on the issue of interim relief. But on April 4, the petitioners were telephonically informed that the appellate authority was not available and the next date would be communicated to them. The petitioners pointed out that till date they had received no intimation from the appellate authority and sought directions to the appellate authority to dispose of the appeals immediately.
The Court observed that the petitioners were suffering an externment and it was affecting their liberty, which is a fundamental right. “Such liberty, can no doubt, be curtailed by following due procedures prescribed under law. However, such liberty, cannot be frustrated by delaying decision on appeals against externment orders. Therefore, we think that the appellate authority should not have treated these appeals so casually because such casualness, directly affects petitioners’ liberty which is one of the most cherished rights under the Constitution of India,” it said.
The Bench further said, “The appellate authorities should bear in mind that normally the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution is not exercised until the petitioner exhausts the alternate remedy of appeal provided under the Externment Statute. Thus, if appeals are kept pending, citizen is, in many cases, deprived of the opportunity of questioning the externment orders directly before the Constitutional Courts. This is yet another reason why the appeals against externment orders must be expeditiously disposed of.”
