- (1.) R. K. Rastogi, J. This is a writ petition to quash the inquiry report dated 30-1-2004 against the petitioner and the order of dismissal from service passed against him on 13-4-2005 and for a direction to the respondents to reinstate him in service with full pay.
(2.) THE facts relevant for disposal of this petition are that the petitioner was a member of judicial service of the State. He was suspended and an inquiry was instituted against him. A charge-sheet was submitted on 3-5-2002 containing 46 charges. THE Inquiry Officer submitted his report on 30-1-2004. He discharged the petitioner in respect of charges No. 5 and 28 and held him guilty for all the remaining charges. THE inquiry report after considering the representation of the petitioner was approved by the Full Court on 5-2-2005 and thereafter of the petitioner was dismissed from service on 13-4-2005, hence, this writ petition. We have heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and Sri Amit Sthalekar, learned Counsel for the respondents. Charge No. 1 framed against the petitioner relates to illegal acquittal of accused persons. The remaining charges relate to illegal grant of bail and illegal release of vehicles in criminal cases. Out of these charges, charges No. 2 to 38 were in respect of grant of bail in those cases which were punishable with life imprisonment but could be tried by Magistrate. Charge No. 39 relates to discrimination in grant of bail in an offence under the Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act, Charges No. 40 to 43 relate to grant of bail without jurisdiction and to illegal discrimination in grant of bail to accused for the offence under The Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. Charge No. 44 relates to discrimination in grant of bail to co-accused in a case under Sections 380, 411 and 457, I. P. C. Charges No. 45 and 46 relate to illegal release of vehicles when another Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gonda was empowered by the High Court to release the vehicles under the Motor Vehicles Act as the Court of Economic Offences.
(3.) THE learned Counsel for the petitioner challenged the findings of the Inquiry Officer on all the aforesaid charges. Hence, we shall consider all the charges and findings of the Inquiry Officer on those charges one by one. Charge No. 1 : First of all we take up charge No. 1. It is in respect of a judgment delivered by the petitioner when he was posted as Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gonda in Crl. Case No. 1415-A of 2000, State v. Rakesh Kumar & Ors. , under Sections 323, 325, 336, 504 and 506, I. P. C. (case crime No. 138 of 1994) police station Rehra Bazar District Gonda.;