Sections 10 to 13: Externment and Preventive Removal

Most of the Act looks backward: it punishes an atrocity after it happens. Chapter III looks forward. Where a person is likely to commit an atrocity in a Scheduled Area, a tribal area or an area identified as atrocity-prone, the Special Court may order him to leave the area for up to three years. The power is drastic, because it uproots a person who has not been convicted of anything, and the Act surrounds it with safeguards: a complaint or police report, written grounds, a right of representation, and judicial control over every step. This note explains Sections 10 to 13, the principles the courts apply to externment generally, and how externment differs from preventive detention and from bail conditions.

Section 10: when can the Special Court extern a person?

Figure 1: Section 10: when can the Special Court extern a person?

1. Section 10: Removal of a Person Likely to Commit an Offence

Section 10, as amended in 2016

(1) Where the Special Court is satisfied, upon a complaint or a police report that a person is likely to commit an offence under Chapter II of this Act in any area included in 'Scheduled Areas' or 'tribal areas', as referred to in article 244 of the Constitution or any area identified under the provisions of clause (vii) of sub-section (2) of section 21, it may, by order in writing, direct such person to remove himself beyond the limits of such area, by such route and within such time as may be specified in the order, and not to return to that area from which he was directed to remove himself for such period, not exceeding three years, as may be specified in the order.

(2) The Special Court shall, along with the order under sub-section (1), communicate to the person directed under that sub-section the grounds on which such order has been made.

(3) The Special Court may revoke or modify the order made under sub-section (1), for the reasons to be recorded in writing, on the representation made by the person against whom such order has been made or by any other person on his behalf within thirty days from the date of the order.

The 2015 Amendment Act made two changes. It extended the power beyond Scheduled and tribal areas to any area identified under Section 21(2)(vii), which requires governments to identify areas where Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes are likely to face atrocities. And it raised the maximum period from two years to three.

The Special Court’s power of removal

The power belongs to the Special Court, not to the police or the executive. This is unusual: under most State police laws, externment is ordered by a police commissioner or magistrate. Placing it with a court of session gives the person a judicial decision-maker from the start.

The area

Scheduled Areas. Areas declared under the Fifth Schedule to the Constitution, referred to in Article 244(1).
Tribal areas. Areas in Assam, Meghalaya, Tripura and Mizoram under the Sixth Schedule, referred to in Article 244(2).
Atrocity-prone areas. Areas identified by the State under Section 21(2)(vii). Since 2016, this brings much of the country's non-tribal territory within the power, provided the area has been identified.
Outside these areas. Section 10 does not apply. Externment elsewhere must rest on a State police law or other statute.

Likely commission of an atrocity

The court must be satisfied that the person is likely to commit an offence under Chapter II. The satisfaction is forward-looking, but it must rest on material: past conduct, threats, a pattern of caste violence, pending cases, or intelligence in a police report. In 2025 the Madras High Court set aside a Special Court's externment order that arose out of a quarrel at a bakery, holding that externment is warranted only where there is real material of atrocities against Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe members, and that the area and the likelihood must be verified (Lokeshwaran Ravi v. State of Tamil Nadu).

Complaint or police report

The court acts 'upon a complaint or a police report'. The Act does not confer a suo motu power. A complaint may come from a victim, a village or a social organisation; a police report usually rests on intelligence about a threatened attack, a planned boycott, or retaliation against a complainant.

Reasonable grounds for externment

Objective material. The court's satisfaction is subjective in form but must rest on objective material. The Supreme Court has described externment as an extraordinary measure, to be used sparingly (Deepak v. State of Maharashtra, 2022).
General nature of allegations. The grounds need to convey the general nature of the material allegations, not every piece of evidence or the names of witnesses, who may be afraid to come forward (Pandharinath Shridhar Rangnekar, 1973; Hari Khemu Gawali, 1956, both under the Bombay Police Act).
Proportionality. An order for the maximum period needs a reason why a shorter one would not do (Deepak, 2022).
Nexus with the area. The order must remove the person from the area where the threat exists; it cannot operate as a general banishment.

Opportunity of hearing

Section 10 does not expressly require a hearing before the order. It builds in a post-decisional hearing: the grounds must be communicated with the order, and the person or anyone on his behalf may make a representation within thirty days, on which the court may revoke or modify the order for reasons recorded in writing. Where there is no urgency, courts prefer a notice before the order, in line with natural justice.

Specified period of removal

The order must specify the route, the time within which the person must leave, and the period, which cannot exceed three years. Unauthorised returns during the period attract Sections 11 and 13.

💡 Analogy: the quarantine line

Externment works like a quarantine line drawn around a village at risk. It does not punish the person outside the line; it keeps a likely danger away from those inside until the risk passes. That is why it needs evidence of the risk, a line drawn no wider than necessary, and an end date.

2. Section 11: Failure to Remove Oneself and Re-entry

The life of an externment order: Sections 10 to 13

Figure 2: The life of an externment order: Sections 10 to 13

Failure to leave. If the person does not remove himself as directed, the Special Court may have him arrested and removed in police custody to a place outside the area (Section 11(1)(a)).
Re-entry after removal. If he returns within the specified period without the court's written permission, the same power applies (Section 11(1)(b)).
Temporary permission. The court may permit him to return for a temporary period, on conditions, and may require a bond with or without sureties (Section 11(2)). It may revoke the permission at any time (Section 11(3)).
Duties on return. He must observe the conditions and leave again when the temporary period ends or the permission is revoked (Section 11(4)).
Arrest and removal after breach. Breach of any condition, or failure to leave, again allows arrest and removal in police custody (Section 11(5)).

Temporary permission serves real needs: attending a court hearing in the area, a family funeral, or the harvest on one's own land. The bond gives the court a hold over the person while he is back inside the line.

3. Section 12: Measurements and Photographs

Power. A person externed under Section 10 must, if the Special Court so requires, allow a police officer to take his measurements and photographs, so that the police can identify him if he returns.
Resistance. If he resists, all necessary means may be used, and resistance is deemed an offence under Section 186 IPC (obstructing a public servant, now BNS Section 221).
Destruction on revocation. When the order is revoked, all measurements and photographs, including negatives, must be destroyed or handed over to him. The provision protects privacy once the justification ends.

4. Section 13: Penalty for Breach of the Order

Section 13

Any person contravening an order of the Special Court made under section 10 shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to one year and with fine.

Section 13 is a separate offence under the Act, and so falls to be tried by the Special Court. There is no minimum sentence, unlike the offences in Section 3. Removal under Section 11 and prosecution under Section 13 are cumulative: the court can remove the person and he can also be prosecuted for the breach.

5. Externment versus Preventive Detention and Bail Conditions

Three ways to keep a person away

Figure 3: Three ways to keep a person away

Externment versus preventive detention

Degree of restraint. Preventive detention confines a person in custody without trial and engages Article 22, with its advisory board and representation safeguards. Externment leaves him free, but outside a defined area.
Rights affected. Externment restricts the freedom to move and reside under Article 19(1)(d) and (e), and must be a reasonable restriction under Article 19(5). Detention restricts personal liberty under Article 21.
Who decides. Externment under Section 10 is ordered by the Special Court; preventive detention is ordered by the executive under a detention law.
Use. Externment is the lesser measure and should be tried first where it can prevent the harm.

Externment versus a bail condition

Scope. A bail condition applies only to an accused in a pending case and lasts only as long as bail. Externment can apply to anyone likely to commit an atrocity, even with no case pending.
Proportionality of conditions. Bail conditions must be proportionate and must not make bail illusory (Parvez Noordin Lokhandwalla, 2020). The Supreme Court has held that a condition which in effect ousts the accused from his home is invalid unless clear and cogent material shows a lesser measure would not suffice; prevention is otherwise the duty of the police (Sachin Yadav v. State (NCT of Delhi), 2026).
Choosing the tool. Where the risk to the victim comes from an accused on bail, a condition not to contact witnesses or enter the victim's hamlet may be enough. Where the risk is wider, or comes from a person not yet accused, Section 10 is the proper route, with its own safeguards.

⚠ Externment is not a shortcut to punishment

Because externment requires no conviction, it can be misused against political rivals or in private disputes. The Act's safeguards, and the High Courts' insistence on real material and a real caste risk, exist to keep it a preventive shield for vulnerable communities, not a weapon in ordinary quarrels.

6. Quick Revision and Memory Aids

'Court, Complaint, Community area, Cap of three'. The Special Court orders; on a complaint or police report; in a Scheduled, tribal or atrocity-prone area; for up to three years.
'Grounds with the order, thirty days to object'. Section 10(2) and (3).
'Leave, return with leave, or be removed'. Section 11.
'Photo and fingerprints, destroyed on revocation'. Section 12.
'One year and fine'. Section 13.
'Two became three'. The 2016 amendment raised the maximum period.

7. Frequently Asked Questions

Can a Special Court extern a person from a village that is not in a Scheduled Area?

Only if the village lies in an area identified under Section 21(2)(vii) as atrocity-prone. Otherwise Section 10 does not apply.

Must the person be an accused in a pending case?

No. Externment is preventive; it requires a likelihood of committing an atrocity, not a pending prosecution.

Is a hearing required before the order?

The Act provides for grounds with the order and a representation within thirty days. A prior hearing is not expressly required, but it is good practice where the situation allows.

Can an externed person return for his son’s wedding?

Yes, with the Special Court's written permission under Section 11(2), for a temporary period and on conditions, possibly with a bond.

What if he returns without permission?

He can be arrested and removed under Section 11 and prosecuted under Section 13, which carries up to one year and fine.

8. Related Topics and Provisions

Topic 9: Territorial Extent. Scheduled and tribal areas.
Topic 29: Special Courts. The court that orders externment.
Section 17: Preventive action by the law and order machinery. The executive counterpart to Chapter III.
Sections 10 to 13; Section 21(2)(vii); Articles 19(1)(d), (e), 22, 244. The provisions discussed.