In *Nawabkhan v. Gujarat*, the Supreme Court held that an order infringing a constitutionally guaranteed right made without hearing the party affected, where hearing was required, would be:

1. In **Nawabkhan v. Gujarat**, the High Court had taken the view that an externment order, although invalid, was not retroactive — i.e. it was valid from its date until the court's invalidating judgment. 2. The Supreme Court approached the matter from a different angle. The externment order affected a **fundamental right (Article 19)** in a manner that was not reasonable; it was therefore **illegal and unconstitutional and hence void**. 3. The Court ruled definitively that **an order infringing a constitutionally guaranteed right made without hearing the party affected, where hearing was required, would be VOID *ab initio* and INEFFECTUAL to bind the parties from the very beginning**. 4. So the appellant could not be convicted for non-observance of such an order. _Source: ICSI CS Executive — Lesson 5, 'Effect of Failure of Natural Justice — Nawabkhan v. Gujarat', p. 128._