JUDGEMENT
M.M.S.BEDI, J. -
(1.) The petitioner, who is working as a Constable in Ist Battalion,
Haryana Armed Police, Ambala, has preferred this writ petition under
Article 226 of the Constitution for quashing order dated 30.9.2003
(Annexure P-5) passed by Commandant, Ist Battalion, Ambala City
imposing a punishment of stoppage of two future annual increments with
permanent effect on the basis of the regular departmental inquiry held
against him and order dated 5.12.2005 (Annexure P-8) passed by Inspector
General of Police, Haryana Armed Police, Madhuban confirming the order
by exercising the powers of appellate authority.
(2.) The allegations against the petitioner in the departmental
proceedings were that while posted at Police Post Mouli, District Panchkula
on 28.3.2003 for law and order duty, he committed the act of misconduct
and obsceneness by teasing school girls along with his associates
C.Sukhdev Singh and Randeep Singh etc., which had let down the image of
the department. F.I.R. 93 dated 28.3.2003 under Section 294 I.P.C. was
registered at Police Station Raipur Rani, District Panchkula. 14 witnesses
were examined. The petitioner was given an opportunity to examine 2
defence witnesses. After enabling him to file written defence, inquiry report
dated 16.9.2003 was submitted holding the petitioner guilty of charges
levelled against him. A show cause notice for imposition of penalty of
dismissal from service was issued and after considering the reply to the
show cause notice, instead of inflicting the punishment of dismissal, with
an objective to give a chance for improvement to the petitioner, punishment
of stoppage of two annual increments with permanent effect was inflicted
on him.
(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the
petitioner has been acquitted by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Panchkula
vide judgment dated 14/3/2005 (Annexure P-7) and,therefore, the provisions
of Rule 16.3 of the Punjab Police Rules ( for short 'the Rules') will be
applicable. Learned counsel has further urged that the order of punishment
has been passed without proper appreciation of evidence and wrongly
recording that the petitioner has admitted the occurrence before D.S.P. Desh
Bandhu during verification of the facts. He has further argued that the
Punishing Authority has wrongly recorded in order dated 3.9.2003
(Annexure P-5) that the petitioner has admitted his misconduct and had
assured that such misconduct will not be repeated in future and the
petitioner had sought a chance for improvement.;
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.