SHRIMADANMOHANUPADHYAYA Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner at the material time was a Sub-Inspector of Police posted at Khizir Sarai police station in the district of Gaya. On being convicted of an offence under section 330 of the Penal Code (voluntarily causing hurt to extort confession etc ), he was dismissed from service by an order contained in communication dated 13.3 1982 from the Deputy Inspector General of Police, Magadh Range, Gaya to the Supdt. of Police, Gaya. The petitioner's appeal was turned down and his dismissal was affirmed by order dated 2.6 1983 passed by the Director-General and Inspector- General of Police, True copies of the dismissal order and order passed in appeal are to be found at Annexures 6 and 9, respectively ; these two orders come under challenge in this application.

(2.) As noted above, the petitioner's dismissal from service was based on his conviction for a criminal offence. His prosecution was instituted on the basis of a complaint filed by one Girija Singh on 17.9.1962. It appears that the petitioner, purportedly in course of investigation into a case relating to the theft of some idols from a village temple picked up the complainant along with two other persons, namely, Anis Mian and Mohsin Mian. They were brought to the Khizir Sarai Police Station on 22 8 1962 and were lodged there in the lock up ; at 3 00 p. m, on the same day they were taken out and were produced before the petitioner who asked them to make a confession regarding the theft of the idols. On their refusing to oblige, it is alleged that they were severely beaten up by the petitioner at the instigation of the local Mukhiya. The petitioner is said to have kicked them with boots and hit them with baton, fists and slaps It was also alleged that nail was pierced in the sole of the right foot of the complainant and in the palm of the right hand of Mohsin Mian. Further allegation was that they were assaulted for a second time in the night of 22 8 1962 and then again on 23 8 1962 and finally they were produced before the Magistrate on 24.8.1962 who remanded them to jail custody where on account of their injury, they were lodged in the jail hospital. 8/65.

(3.) The aforesaid complaint gave rise to S. T. No.--- 136/65 In this case the petitioner (as also the Mukhiya) was convicted of offences under sections 452, 438, 330 and 323 of the Penal Code and was sentenced to undergo three years' rigorous imprisonment. The petitioner's appeal against the Trial Court's judgment was allowed to the extent that the appellate court acquitted him of the other charges but maintained the conviction under section 330 of the Penal Code. It disbelieved the prosecution story that any assault was committed by the petitioner on 23 8.1962 but the prosecution case regarding the petitioner having committed assault on the complainant and the other two persons on 22 8 1962 with a view to extort confession was found to have been esstablished. With reference to the injury report which had found punctured wound on the right palm of Mohsin that appeared to have been caused by some pointed weapon like iron nail, the nature of assault as stated by the prosecution was also accepted by the appellate court As stated above, the appellate court though maintaining the petitioner's conviction under section 330 alone of the Penal Code declined to interfere with the sentence and the petitioner was directed to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years.