PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J. - (1.) THE petitioner was employed as a Constable with the Railway Protection Force and was admittedly on duty along with Naik Laxmi Narain and Ct.Harbans Singh on the intervening night of 18th and 19th January 1996 from 1800 hours i.e. 6:00 PM of 18.1.1996 till 0600 hours of 19.1.1996. THE petitioner admits so.
(2.) NAIK Laxmi Narain had to ring up the Control Room inasmuch as he found petitioner having left place of duty. ASI Ramjit posted as Night Shift Officer responded and went to the place where petitioner, NAIK Laxmi Narain and Ct.Harbans Singh were on duty and went to locate the petitioner he learnt from the gateman of age No.413, namely Sh.Devinder Singh, that the petitioner had gone towards a liquor vend. The petitioner was found in a state of high intoxication and when ASI Ramjit was recording the statements of the gateman the petitioner ran away. The petitioner was charge-sheeted as under:- "Statement of article of charge framed against Constable Satya Prakash Shukla, RPF, Coy. No.25/Moradabad. Article-I He is charged for gross neglect and serious misconduct in that on 18/19.1.96 while detailed to perform safety duty of ACSR wire from 18:00 to 06:00 hours, between Katghar to Bholagarh section with Arms Ammunition along with Naik Laxmi Narain and Const.Harbans Singh he left his duty beat on 1830 hours and returned at 20:45 hours in drunken condition with Arms Ammunition." The statement of imputation in support of the Article of Charge reads as under:- "Statement of imputation of charge framed against Const.Satya Prakash Shukla RPF/Coy No.25/MB. On 18/19.1.96 while detailed to perform safety duty of ACSR wire from 18:00 hours to 06:00 hours between Katgarh to Bholagarh section along with Naik Laxmi Narain and Constable Harbans Singh he left his duty beat at 1830 hours. Since whereabouts of Const. were not known as such a control message was conveyed to Security Control Room by Naik Laxmi Narain for information. On receipt of message ASI Ramjeet along with Nk.Joginder Singh, Const.Virpal Singh, Const.Jai Pal Singh and Const.Virender Singh by Allwyn Nissan visited the site and found Const.Satya Prakash Shukla in drunken condition and unfit for duty. His Arms Ammunition were in the custody of Naik Laxmi Narain."
(3.) BEING a little unconventional, to save on paper, we reproduce the statements made by the petitioner in writing before the Inquiry Officer after the evidence was led and the petitioner was required to give his version by way of his statement if he so desired. The petitioner has himself filed the translated version of his statement, inasmuch as we find that petitioners written statement before the Inquiry Officer is in vernacular, thus we reproduce the translated version given by the petitioner himself, being Annexure P-5 to the writ petition. It reads as under:- "I, Constable Satya Prakash Shukla state that on 18/1/96 between 18 hours to 6 hours, I was posted along with Naik Laxmi Narain and Constable Harbans Singh in between Katgarh to Molagarh at PTL cutting security. I reached there along with them at right time along with arms and ammunition. At around 19/30 hours, Naik Laxmi Narain and Constable Harbans Singh started taking dinner and I went there after arms and ammunition to Naik Laxmi Narain. After informing him that I am going to take tea and I started taking tea in the just adjacent shop and after tea I felt pain in my stomach and I went to the toilet to ease myself and thereafter I washed my hands and my mouth and after some time feeling pain in my stomach I sat there and after some time after taking rest I came on the beat. Then I found that ASI Ramjit is present there along with his staff and they asked about where I had gone. Then I told the entire story. Then ASI told for coming along with them at Coy. Office and I abide by that order and I came in Coy. Office. Then he deposited my arms and ammunition in Coy. No.30 and asked for tendering my statement. He spoke the statement and I wrote the statement and the statement was given to him. Thereafter, he told that I had taken wine, that is why I am sending you back. On that stated that I have not taken wine and also I do not take wine while on duty. If I had taken wine then firstly from Coy. No.25 I had not been given my departure report and from Coy. No.30 I could not have got arms and ammunition and my commander could not have taken along with me on duty and if I had taken the wine on duty then I should have been sent for medical examination. The applicant, if he had taken the wine and under the unconscious state of mind as stated by ASI in his report then how can I ran away from the office. Whether a person who has taken the wine and is unconscious can run away. That is why the allegation which has been leveled on the applicant is baseless. This is the statement of the applicant." Suffice would it be to state that explaining his not being at the place of work, petitioner claims having left with the permission of Naik Laxmi Narain to take tea and claims that while he was taking tea, he had a stomach ache and went to the toilet to ease himself and since the pain continued he started taking rest when ASI Ramjit along with other Force personnel came to the place where he had gone. Claiming not to have consumed alcohol, petitioner stated that if he had consumed alcohol he would not have been given departure report to proceed on duty and as regards his consuming alcohol on duty he stated that if this was so, why was he not sent for medical examination and with respect to the evidence that he was found in an unconscious state by ASI Ramjit, petitioner stated that how can he run away if he was unconscious.;