UNION OF INDIA Vs. EX. CONSTABLE RAM KARAN
LAWS(SC)-2021-11-14
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA (FROM: DELHI)
Decided on November 11,2021

UNION OF INDIA Appellant
VERSUS
Ex. Constable Ram Karan Respondents


Referred Judgements :-

UNION OF INDIA VS. GULAM MOHD BHAT [REFERRED TO]
LUCKNOW K.GRAMIN BANK VS. RAJENDRA SINGH [REFERRED TO]



Cited Judgements :-

HARI OM RASTOGI VS. STATE OF U.P. [LAWS(ALL)-2022-5-124] [REFERRED TO]
RAJENDRA PRASAD MISHRA VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(ALL)-2023-12-94] [REFERRED TO]
R. SENTHIL KUMAR VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(MAD)-2024-1-218] [REFERRED TO]
ROOP SINGH ALAWA VS. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH [LAWS(MPH)-2025-5-1] [REFERRED TO]
KIRTI KUMAR DWIVEDI VS. REGISTRAR GENERAL HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH [LAWS(MPH)-2022-2-47] [REFERRED TO]
YOGINDER SINGH VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(J&K)-2023-7-19] [REFERRED TO]
RAVINDRA KUMAR SINGH VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(CAL)-2023-5-121] [REFERRED TO]
SANTOSH SONDHIA VS. STATE OF M.P. [LAWS(MPH)-2022-12-153] [REFERRED TO]
UNION OF INDIA VS. SUBRATA NATH [LAWS(SC)-2022-11-85] [REFERRED TO]
UNION OF INDIA VS. CONST SUNIL KUMAR [LAWS(SC)-2023-1-46] [REFERRED TO]
UDHAB CHARAN PRADHAN VS. DIRECTOR GENERAL AND INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE [LAWS(ORI)-2024-3-104] [REFERRED TO]
LALIT PRATAP SINGH VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(CHH)-2022-4-42] [REFERRED TO]
JACOB K. A. VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(KER)-2022-9-252] [REFERRED TO]
P P RATHOD VS. GUJARAT WATER SUPPLY & SEWERAGE BOARD [LAWS(GJH)-2024-3-84] [REFERRED TO]
PUVVALA RAMA MOHAN RAO VS. STATE OF A.P. [LAWS(APH)-2024-7-77] [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

RASTOGI, J. - (1.)Leave granted.
(2.)Union of India, in the instant appeal, has challenged the judgment and order passed by the Division Bench of the High Court of Delhi substituting the penalty of removal from service inflicted on the respondent after holding disciplinary inquiry as provided under Rule 27 of The Central Reserve Police Force Rules, 1955 (hereinafter being referred to as the "Rules 1955 ") with confinement of respondent from 1.00 p.m. to 10.00 p.m. in quarter guard jail without noticing the mandate of the nature of punishments indicated under Section 11(1) of The Central Reserve Police Force Act, 1949 (hereinafter being referred to as the "Act 1949 ").
(3.)The brief facts of the case culled out from the record are that the respondent joined service with the Central Reserve Police Force in the year 1983 and was on attachment duty at Group Centre, CRPF. In 2003, his wife was under treatment of Dr. Nazir, Gynaecologist (complainant). On 12th September 2003, the respondent accompanied with his wife forcibly entered into the chamber of the Dr. Nazir­complainant and asked him to attest the reimbursement of medical claims and upon his refusal, the respondent verbally abused and physically struck the Doctor­Complainant, resulting in injuries. He was escorted out by the Constable Suresh, who also happened to see the conduct of the respondent and his wife. Respondent not only misbehaved and abused the Doctor­complainant while on duty in which he sustained injuries on his face but to conceal his misconduct, he made a false allegation of sexual harassment on his wife against the Doctor­complainant. For such a gross misconduct, which he had committed while in service, he was placed under suspension and a Charge Memo dated 29th October, 2003 for holding disciplinary inquiry under Rule 27 of the Rules 1955 came to be served upon him for (i) violation of Section 11(1) of the Rules 1955, for misbehaving and abusing and injuring the Doctor­complainant while on official duty; and (ii) for instituting false criminal charges of sexual harassment against the Doctor­complainant. Article of Charge 1 and Charge 2 of the Charge Memo along with the details are reproduced hereunder:­
"ARTICLE I

Constable Driver No.961340413 Ram Karan of 120BN while being at the post of Constable have violated rule 11(1) being the member of the force on 12.9.03 around 12.00 senior medical officer who was on official duty Const. Ram Karan misbehaved and abused due to which received injuries near bus left eye which is punishable under the act.

ARTICLE II

Constable Driver Ram Karan 120 BN while being posted in Pinjore as Const/Driver in the Month of September 2003 has violated CRPF rules 1949 rule 11(1) being the member of the force misbehaved with doctor Abdul Nair abused him that the doctor had misbehaved with his wife Savita Devi who has visited the doctor along with her husband who had violated the said rules."

Details

"The said Const/Driver Rain Karan did 10.3.03 to 26.9.03 was posted in Pinjore. Wife of Const/Driver were under treatment of senior medical officer Dr. Nazir on 11.9.03 has set her case for consideration. Smt. Savita dated 12.9.03 around 11.15 has visited Dr. Nazir with Cash memo No.2137 dated 11.9.03 she left the room that her husband is going to teach him a lesson. Around 12.00 driver Ram Karan visited the office saying to authorize the cash memo in which medicine prescribed by the doctor were not mentioned when refused he misbehaved and abused the doctor.

The said, misbehaviour was reported by Dr. Abdul Nazir to the senior official Pinjore on the complaint of Abdul Nazir action was taken against Cont. Ram Karan and suspended on the same day. In order to gain sympathy of the general public he falsely made allegation against Dr. Nazir of sexual abuse of his wife. According to const. Ram Karan his wife Savita was under treatment of Dr. Abdul Nazir and had gone for a checkup. During check up Dr. Nazir sexually abused her and on calling her husband for help and when his husband entered the room he was beaten by the doctor.

Hence Cont./Driver Ram Karan has made false allegations against Dr. Nazir of sexual abuse of his wife Savita. His only purpose of doing so was to save himself from injury and gain sympathy of public although according to witnesses on 12.9.03 around 12.00 he along with his wife has entered the room of the doctor."



Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.