- (1.) This matter was referred to a larger Bench by the learned Single Judge in the light of the fact that two Division Bench judgments of this Court Head Constable Munshi Ram v. State of Haryana and others, 1991 2 RSJ 345 and Om Parkash v. State of Haryana and others,1994 6 SLR 228, has held that charge of absence from duty cannot be levelled against a police officer during the period of his suspension.
(2.) The learned Single Judge in his reference stated that the relevant provisions of Rule 16.21 (2) of the Punjab Police Rules, 1934 as applicable to Haryana (hereinafter referred to as the 1934 Rules), were not brought to the notice of their Lordships which specifically provides for a suspended police officer to attend all roll calls and perform such duties and to attend such parades as the Superintendent of Police may direct. Accordingly, the matter was put up before this Bench for decision.
(3.) The bare facts required for adjudication of this case are that the petitioner who was dismissed from service joined the Department of Police, Haryana as Constable on 18.12.1971. In August, 1986, the petitioner was posted at Narnaul, when he and Head Constable Jagdish Parshad were deployed to receive accused Varinder Singh son of Rattan Singh from Borstal Jail, Hisar, for being produced in the Court of JMIC, Rewari. The said accused was accordingly produced in Court and while he was being taken back to Borstal Jail, Hisar, he escaped from custody of Head Constable Jagdish Parshad and the petitioner in transit. The Superintendent of Police, Narnaul-respondent No. 3 placed the petitioner as well as said Head Constable Jagdish Parshad under suspension vide his order dated 21.8.1986 and instituted a departmental inquiry under Rule 16.34 of the 1934 Rules and the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Narnaul, was appointed the as an Inquiry Officer. On suspension, the petitioner was sent to Police Lines, Narnaul as per Rule 16.21 of the 1934 Rules.;