SHRI SASHI KANT MISHRA Vs. THE STATE OF ASSAM
HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI
Shri Sashi Kant Mishra
The State Of Assam
Click here to view full judgement.
HRISHIKESH ROY,J. -
(1.) Heard Mr. A.C. Kalita, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. The respondent Nos. 1-4 are represented by Mr. D. Nath, the learned Addl. Sr. Govt. Advocate, Assam.
(2.) The petitioner is a former Unarmed Branch (UB) Constable of the Guwahati City District Enforcement Force (DEF) and he is aggrieved by the discharge order dated 03.11.2006 (Annexure-8) in pursuant to a disciplinary proceeding and the affirmation of the penalisation order, by the learned Assam Administrative Tribunal, under its judgment dated 03.04.2010 (Annexure-11) in the Case No. 62 ATA/2007.Relevant Facts
(3.) On the intervening night of 20th and 21st January, 2006, the delinquent constable was detailed for sentry duty at the Panbazar Police Station. While on duty, one under-trial prisoner (Promod Kumar Balkiwala) in the police lockup, was allowed by the delinquent to come out of the lockup and have tea in the veranda of the police station. The prisoner was handcuffed and was left unguarded and in the meantime, the sentry constable attended to other tasks. During this period, the accused managed to escape from the police station. Thus disciplinary proceeding was drawn up with the show-cause notice of 17.03.2006 (Annexure-1) with the following statement of allegation:-"Statement of Allegation
While UBC/4156 Sachi Kanta Misra was posted at Panbazar on 21.1.2006 night he was detailed for sentry duty, he took out accused of Panbazar P.S. Case No. 468/06 under section 406/381 IPC. Sri Promode Kr. Bakliwala from the lockup with out handcuff and allowed him to have tea outside the veranda and instead of keeping watch he left for other work in morning on 22.1.2006. As a result the U.T.P. Promode Kr. Bakliwala manaed to escape from the custody. In this connection Panbazar P.S. registered Case No. 17/06 under section 229/109 IPC, and arrested him and H.G. Digamber Kalita and forwarded in to custody. During investigation it is found that the accused managed to escape due to negligence of him.
His such act tantamount to his gross misconduct and negligence of duty, which render him unfit to be retained in a disciplined force.
Therefore he was charged with gross misconduct and negligence of duty.";
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.