I.A. Ansari, J. - (1.) THIS case strengthens the common belief that by collusion or otherwise, howsoever hard one tries to suppress, manipulate or mutilate the truth, yet truth has its strange ways of surfacing. If the truth surfaces, it will be unjust and improper to ignore the truth and be lenient to the person, who has tried hard to suppress the truth.
(2.) THE petitioner, who is an inspector of police in Arunachal Pradesh Police Force, has approached this Court, with the help of the present application made under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking issuance of appropriate writ(s) setting aside and quashing the impugned order, dated 6.10.1997 (Annexure 1 to the writ petition) issued by the respondent No. 3, namely, the Inspector General of Police, PHQ, Arunachal Pradesh, whereby penalty of reduction of three stages for a period of three years with cumulative effect has been imposed on the petitioner following a departmental proceeding drawn against him and the order dated 14.5.1999 (Annexure J to the writ petition) passed by the respondent No. 2, namely, the Commissioner and Secretary (Home), Govt. of Arunachal Pradesh, whereby petitioner's appeal against the said order imposing penalty was turned down. In a nutshell, the facts and various stages leading to this writ petition may be set out as follows : (i) By a memorandum, dated 10.5.1996 (Annexure F to the writ petition) respondent No. 3 initiated a disciplinary proceeding under the CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965, read with Section 7 of the Police Act, 1861, against the petitioner directing him to show cause against the Article of Charge, which read as under : "That Inspector T. Habung (u/s) of PHQ security cell Itanagar, on 27.1.1996, physically assaulted H/C (Dvr) K. Kalita of Fire Station Itanagar without any provocation and as a result, H/C (Dvr) K. Kalita sustained serious injury on his person and later on, he was admitted in R.K. Mission hospital and undergone an emergency operation on 28.1.1996. The act of voluntarily causing grievous injury to HC(Dvr) of the same department amounts to gross misconduct, high handedness and conduct unbecoming of a member of disciplined police force. Hence, Inspr. T. Habung (u/s) is liable to be departmentally proceeded under Rule 14 of the CCS (CC&A) Rules, 1965. (ii) The Statement of imputation of misconduct in support of the Article of Charge framed against the petitioner read as under : "That on 27.1.1996, fireman Tayer Shakti of PS Itanagar had received an information regarding his son's illness. Accordingly F/M T. Shakti along with Jeep No. ARZ -1277 driven by H/C K. Kalita went to Ganga to meet his brother to ask for some money to go the Pasighat. While they were returning from Akash deep Market, the vehicle met with an accident with one Gypsy No. AR -01 -2008 and the matter was settled by them by agreeing to repair the Gypsy at their cost. But in the meantime Inspr. T. Habung appeared at the spot and started beating driver K. Kalita. On medical examination, the doctor referred HC(dvr) K. Kalita for USG examination apprehending serious internal injuries. On 28.1.96, he was admitted in R.K. Mission Hospital and underwent an emergency operation to repair his damaged intestine. During the enquiry, it is found that Shri T. Habung Inspr. of Police has assaulted a driver of fire service and caused serious injuries almost endangering the life of the said driver and hence the charge." (iii) The petitioner, on 26.10.1996, submitted his written statement (Annexure F1 to the writ petition) in his defence, his case being, briefly stated, thus : On 27.1.1996, the petitioner along with his nephew, Shri Mudang Bagang, had gone for a social visit to his friend Shri Hage Pilya's home, at Niti Vihar, at about 1930 hrs. At about 2030 hrs, the petitioner received a phone call from his house that Shri Bamin Hinda and his family had come to his house. After about ten minutes, the petitioner along with his nephew left Niti Vihar for his home at H Sector. On the way at NH -52 after crossing Akash Deep and before reaching the tria -junction of old PHQ, the petitioner saw a vehicle coming at full speed in a zig -zag manner from R.K. Mission Hospital side. The petitioner slowed down his vehicle, but the said vehicle coming from the opposite direction reached the petitioner's vehicle and the petitioner had to drive his vehicle to a road -side drain to save himself and in the process, the shock absorber of the petitioner's vehicle got damaged. When the petitioner looked back, he saw that the said vehicle had a head -on collision with another vehicle, which was also proceedings towards Ganga. Somehow, the petitioner, then, drove out his vehicle from the drain by using special gear and drove his vehicle to the place of the accident located at a distance of about fifty meters. The petitioner got down from his vehicle and found the driver of the Fire Brigade vehicle was still in his driving seat. The petitioner did not see anybody with him. The petitioner asked the driver, whom he had not recognised, as to why did he drive his vehicle in such a way. The driver told the petitioner that it was his mistake and asked the petitioner to forgive him and saying this much, the driver got down from his vehicle. The petitioner could, at that point of time, notice that the said driver was under influence of some drugs. The petitioner also noticed the registration number of the vehicle as Jeep No. ARZ -1277 belonging to fire brigade and Gypsy No. AR -01 -2008, which was driven by one Shri Mili Nikte. The petitioner shouted at fire brigade driver saying what would have happened if he had not driven his vehicle to the drain. After this, the petitioner left the spot and went to a shop from where he made telephone call to the police station and talked with SI J. Taggu and asked him to come to the place of accident immediately and, then, the petitioner left for his house as his friend was waiting at his home. On the following day, i.e., on 28.1.1996, early in the morning, the petitioner received a phone call from Inspector B.B. Gohain asking him about the accident and also informing the petitioner that driver H.C. K. Kalita, was seriously lying at R.K. Mission Hospital. The petitioner, immediately, rushed to the hospital and found H.C. Kalita just operated. The petitioner asked him as to who had caused him so much injury and HC Kalita told the petitioner that two persons had beaten him before the petitioner came to the spot. This statement of HC Kalita was heard by two fire brigade staffs, who were standing near the bed of Kalita. Then, someone informed the petitioner that doctors had asked not to speak to HC Kalita. The petitioner, then, left for his home. (iv) In course of time, respondent No. 4, namely, Shri JS Sidhu, Commandant, 2nd Bn., BHQ, was appointed as Enquiry Officer in the disciplinary proceeding drawn against the petitioner. After holding the enquiry, Enquiry Officer submitted his report to the effect that the accusations made against the petitioner stood proved despite the fact that the injured, namely,. H.C. (driver) K. Kalita and one eye witness, namely, Constable Mille Nikte, had not completely supported their earlier versions recorded at the time of preliminary enquiry. The respondent No. 3, upon hearing the petitioner, accepted the findings of the Enquiry Officer and served a notice, dated 30.6.1997 (Annexure H to the writ petition), directing the petitioner to show cause as to why penalty of reduction of three stages for a period of three years with cumulative effect shall not be imposed on the petitioner. On receiving the notice, the petitioner submitted his representation, dated 3.6.1997 (Annexure H1 to the writ petition). The disciplinary authority, however, vide order, dated 16.10.1997 (Annexure 1 to the writ petition), imposed the penalty as indicated hereinabove, whereupon the petitioner preferred an appeal, but the same was also turned down by the respondent No. 2 vide order, dated 14.5.1999 (Annexure J1). Hence, the petitioner has, now, approached this Court seeking reliefs as indicated hereinbefore, his case being, briefly stated, thus : On 27.1.1996, when the petitioner was returning home driving his vehicle, he saw near a tria -junction at Ganga, a Jeep belonging to Fire Brigade coming towards him at high speed from the opposite direction. The petitioner drove his vehicle towards a drain located at his left side to save the vehicle from being dashed against by the Jeep. After crossing the petitioner's vehicle, the Jeep dashed against a Gypsy at a distance of about 50 meters. The petitioner went to the place of accident and found the driver of the Jeep, namely, HC K. Kalita under the influence of liquor. The petitioner, accordingly, informed Itanagar PS and GD Entry No. 1108 was made. On the following day, i.e., on 28.1.1996, the petitioner came to know that the driver of the Jeep had been admitted at R.K. Mission Hospital in a serious condition, where he had undergone an operation and Itanagar PS case No. 04/96 under Section 341/325 IPC had been registered against the petitioner on the basis of false accusations made in an FIR (Annexure B to the writ petition). The case, so registered, ultimately, ended with filing of charge -sheet against the petitioner under Section 341/325 IPC. However, in the trial Court, the petitioner was acquitted by the trial Court by order, dated 28.6.1996. When the criminal proceeding was so pending, a departmental proceeding was initiated against the petitioner. This was highly prejudicial to the defence of the petitioner. Even though the trial ended in acquittal of the accused -petitioner, departmental proceeding was continued and though the injured and one of the eye witnesses did not support the accusations made in the Article of Charge framed against the petitioner, the Enquiry Officer held the petitioner guilty of the charge on the basis of the statement given by the informant of the case, namely, Fire Man Tayer Shakti. No Presenting Officer was appointed in the disciplinary proceeding and the Enquiry Officer, therefore, acted as a Presenting Officer too. The petitioner was also not provided with any defence assistance. The Enquiry Officer incorrectly held the petitioner guilty of the charge despite the fact that the injured as well as the driver of the Gypsy, which was involved in the accident, had stated clearly that they had not seen the petitioner assaulting H.C. K. Kalita and the Medical Officer had opined that the injuries found on the victim, i.e., K. Kalita could have been caused due to accident. The petitioner made his representation against the enquiry report, but the same was turned down. The penalty imposed on the petitioner is too harsh. The petitioner has been working with all sincerity and devotion to the utmost satisfaction of the authorities concerned.
(3.) THE respondents have contested this case by filing affidavit -in -opposition, their case being, in brief, thus: The enquiry conducted was just and fair and no illegality was committed in conducting the enquiry and/or imposing penalty inasmuch as contrary to what the petitioner has claimed, the petitioner has committed gross misconduct on a number of occasions and he also stands punished following various departmental enquiries. The criminal case against the petitioner had commenced on the strength of the FIR lodged by the driver of the Gypsy, which had dashed against the Jeep, driven by the injured K. Kalita. HC (driver) K. Kalita was mercilessly beaten by the petitioner at the very place of accident so much so that he had to be admitted in R.K. Mission Hospital and operated on the very night of the accident. The Fireman, Tayer Shakti, then, lodged a written complaint, vide Annexure B, that when he was returning to fire station with a Jeep driven by K. Kalita, the same collided with a Gypsy, the petitioner came to the place of accident and badly assaulted K. Kalita and that after a few minutes, police party arrived there and injured K. Kalita was admitted into R.K. Mission Hospital. The findings of the enquiry were based on the materials on record and hence, the same were accepted after according due hearing, in this regard, to the petitioner.;