Supreme Court Quashes Externment Order for Violation of Natural Justice, Sets Aside High Court's Dismissal

Case Snapshot

• Case Name: Vijay Kumar Rajpoot @ Vijju v. State of Chhattisgarh & Ors.

• Citation: 2026 INSC 926

• Bench: Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice Satish Chandra Sharma

• Date of Judgment: August 31, 2026

• Area of Law: Criminal Law, Externment, Preventive Detention, Natural Justice, Constitutional Law

The Judgment in One Line

Supreme Court quashes ex parte extermment order passed without notice, holding statutory hearing under Section 8 is mandatory and cannot be dispensed with.

Why This Judgment Matters

This judgment reaffirms the fundamental requirement of natural justice in extermment proceedings, which directly impact personal liberty and freedom of movement under Article 19(1)(d). It establishes that even when a closed case is reopened based on fresh developments, the District Magistrate must issue fresh notice and afford a hearing under Section 8 of the Adhiniyam. The ruling also clarifies that administrative authorities have no inherent power to review their own orders unless statutorily empowered. The judgment serves as a strong warning against routine relegation to alternative remedies when fundamental rights are violated.

Background

The appellant faced extermment proceedings under the Chhattisgarh Rajya Suraksha Adhiniyam, 1990. The District Magistrate initially closed the case on October 6, 2025, recording that the appellant had been acquitted in earlier cases and no fresh police report was submitted. The appellant was let off with a warning.

Two subsequent developments occurred: (i) FIR No. 117/2023 under the Municipal Corporation Act (later quashed by High Court); and (ii) FIR No. 483/2025 under BNS and SC/ST Act for alleged derogatory remarks aga

... Upgrade to a Premium Plan to view the full judgment.