- (1.) Petitioner, who is a Sub Inspector in U.P. Police, is aggrieved by an order dated 26th December, 1997, passed under Rule 8 (2)(b) of the Uttar Pradesh Police Officers of the Sub ordinate Ranks (Punishment and Appeal) Rules, 1991, dismissing him from service, without holding any disciplinary proceedings on the ground that a chargesheet had been submitted against him by C.B.C.I.D., under Sections 302/34/167/177/218/120-B I.P.C.
(2.) Facts, relevant for adjudicating the controversy involved, are that petitioner was posted at the relevant point of time at Police Station Milakh Khanam, District Rampur, as a Sub Inspector. A First Information Report was lodged at 1.30 a.m. on 28.8.1992, by the petitioner, stating that police party was attacked by certain militants, in which one of the members of police party i.e. Constable Yashvir Singh was killed. A request was made by father of the deceased Constable to the State Government for proper investigation on the ground that the version recorded in the F.I.R. lodged by the petitioner was not correct, and complainant sensed foul play. Consequently, the matter was transferred to C.B.C.I.D. Investigation was carried out, in which it found that the version of petitioner about attack by terrorists upon the police party was baseless, and consequently, another F.I.R. was registered by the C.B.C.I.D., in which a chargesheet was filed holding the petitioner guilty of committing murder of Constable. It seems that petitioner was initially placed under suspension on 30th August, 1992, but the suspension was subsequently revoked on 18th December, 1992. However, after a chargesheet was filed on 10th February, 1997 against the petitioner, the Deputy Inspector General of Police proceeded to invoke his authority under Rule 8(2)(b) of the Rules of 1991 to pass the order of dismissal.
(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the incident, in respect of which the order of dismissal has been passed, related to the year 1992, and for a period of nearly five years, no proceedings were drawn, and without there being any material available on record to support the finding that disciplinary proceedings were not possible in the matter or that holding of enquiry was not practicable, the respondents have proceeded to dismiss the petitioner from service, which is arbitrary. Reliance has been placed upon a Division Bench Judgment of this Court in Pushpendra Singh (C.P. 2187) & Another Vs. State of U.P. & Another, 2008 3 ADJ 689, as well as judgment of Hon'ble Single Judge in Om Prakash Yadav Vs. State of U.P. and others, 2012 7 ADJ 74.;