Sunil Ambwani - (1.) HEARD Shri Vijay Gautam, learned counsel for the petitioner. Learned standing counsel appears for the respondents.
(2.) IN the year, 2006, the petitioner a Constable No. 218 in civil police was posted at P. S. Kotwali, district Ghazipur. It is alleged that on 22/23.7.2006 when he was assigned duties with Circle Officer, Saidpur, he left his duties, stopped Truck No. UP61-C-5237 and was demanding money, when the Superintendent of Police, Ghazipur reached on the spot. The petitioner and one other person ran away leaving the motor cycle, on which they were riding on the spot. The truck driver and the trader sitting in the truck made a complaint about illegal demands made by the petitioner and his accomplice. A preliminary enquiry was conducted, after which a regular departmental enquiry was held by Shri Dilip Kumar, Addl. Superintendent of Police (Rural), district Ghazipur. The enquiry officer submitted his findings and recommended to punish the petitioner with dismissal of service under Rule 14 (1) of the U. P. Police Officers of Subordinate Rank (Punishment and Appeal) Rules, 1991. The petitioner was given a show cause notice with the enquiry report to give a reply. His reply was considered by the Superintendent of Police and was not found satisfactory. The Superintendent of Police, Ghazipur found that the charges against the petitioner were established and ordered to dismiss him from service. The appeal filed by the petitioner was dismissed by the Deputy Inspector General of Police on 31.12.2007, and the revision filed was dismissed by the Inspector General of Police on 21.4.2008 giving rise to this writ petition for quashing the order and for reinstatement with full back wages and consequential benefits. The enquiry officer had found that the petitioner had stopped the truck in the night of 22/23.7.2006, laden with cows within the jurisdiction of P. S. Saidpur alongwith Constable Civil Police, Harish Chand and had demanded money from the truck driver. He was placed under suspension on 2.8.2006 and was charged for demanding illegal gratification from the driver of the truck and thereby committing gross in-discipline and misconduct. The petitioner denied the charges on which Constable Harish Chandra, Constable Raja Ram, Head Constable Shambhu Nath, Driver Babloo Gaur son of Rajnath Gaur and the trader Ramman son of Ramdhari and Angad were examined. The charged constable took a defence that he was on beat duty in the night of 22/23.7.2006. At about 1.30 a.m. he did not feel well and requested his fellow constable for his permission to leave the spot for taking medicines. Shri Shambhu Nath, his fellow constable allowed him to go to the doctor on which the petitioner left for police station with his rifle and cartridges. On reaching the police station he felt reeling sensation, on which he left his rifle and cartridges on his bed and took rest. When he did not find any improvement in his condition, he went to a doctor and was admitted to the hospital. At about 6.00 in the evening on 24.7.2006 he returned back to the police station and found that after he had left the place of his duty, the Addl. Superintendent of Police had visited and found him to be absent. The petitioner produced the medical certificate in proof of his explanation.
(3.) THE constable Sambhu Nath Ram did not support his statement and stated that at 1.30 p.m. he was alone on the picket when the Addl. Superintendent of Police made surprise checking. THE petitioner had left without informing him half an hour before the inspection. He had informed this fact to the Addl. Superintendent of Police, after which he has reported the matter to the police station at about 2.30 a.m. in 'rojnamcha aam' and deposited his rifle and cartridge. THE witness in reply to the specific questions put to him told the enquiry officer that when the petitioner was leaving the duty, he had not given any reason to him and had left the place without informing him. THE witness also denied that the constable Raja Ram had met him during beat or at picket. The truck driver did not recognize the petitioner and stated that when his truck moved from Saidpur town to Nand Ganj, a motor cycle with two persons one of which was in uniform stopped his vehicle. He did not recognise the petitioner and stated that one of the persons wearing the uniform was a constable, but that he is not certain about the department of the constable. Shri Angad Yadav, the trader had given Rs. 500 but that he had not seen him giving the money and had lodged a report of the incident of the police officer. Shri Angad Yadav, the trader accompanying the truck stated that he was transporting his cows for sale to Chochak Pur Mela. When the truck moved from Saidpur Kasba to Nand Ganj, two persons out of which one was in uniform and the other was in plain clothes on a motorcycle approached them and stopped the truck. They demanded Rs. 600 but that he did not give money to them. He was not in a position to say whether the person wearing uniform was a constable and his department. He may not be able to identify him as he had not seen them earlier.;