S.N.Bhargava, J. - (1.) This second appeal has been directed against the judgment and decree passed by the learned Addl. Disst. Judge No. 5, Jaipur City, Jaipur, setting aside the judgment and decree passed by the Additional Munsif and Judicial Magistrate No. 2, Jaipur City, by which he had decreed the suit of the plaintiff appellants.
(2.) The appellants were posted at Police Station, Kolba, District Jaipur. They were sent along with another constable Sagar Mal for getting the police remand from the Magistrate at Bandikui, for the accused Lohariya. Since no Magistrate was available at Bandikui, they went to Dausa, where also, no Magistrate was available and therefore, they came to Jaipur and went to the residence of the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jaipur, who refused to grant police remand and ordered for.judicial custody of the accused. Since the accused could not be lodged in jail in the night, the appellants took the accused to Kolba police Station, by passenger train 14 Dn, leaving Jaipur at about 8.30 p.m. The accused was kept in the police lock up at police station Kolba in the night. The accused was taken in the morning at about 6.45 a.m. by shuttle to Bandikui but the accused gave a severe jerk and jolt by which the leather belt of the Constable Sagar Mal was broken and the accused at once jumped out of the train. Chain was pulled and after the train stopped, all the three persons could search out the accused with the help of other persons and they surrendered the accused at Police Station Kolba in the same night and lodged a case under section 224 IPC. With regard to the aforesaid incident, both the appellants and Sagar Mal were subjected to enquiry under Rule 16 of the Rajasthan Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1958 and a joint enquiry under Rule 18 was held. The Enquiry Officer exonerated the police constable Sagar Mal and the appellants but the Supdt. of Police did not agree with the enquiry report and gave a show cause notice, proposing penalty of removal from service. The appellants submitted their reply and after considering the reply, the Supdt. of Police inflinted the punishment of removal from service on both the appellants as well as Sagar Mal, by his order dated 31.7.1981. The Dy. Inspector General of Police also dismissed the appeal preferred by these persons, giving reasons in detail. A review petition was filed before the Governor and the review petition was also rejected by a detailed order dated 16.1.1983. Thereafter, a notice under section 80 CPC was given and the suit was filed.
(3.) Learned Trial Court, after recording evidence decreed the suit and set aside the order of dismissal passed against the appellants as well as Sagar Mal. The State Government preferred an appeal and the learned first appellate court, by his order dated 2.4.1990 accepted the appeal, set aside the judgment of the trial court and maintained the order of dismissal. It is against this judgment and decree that the present appeal has been filed.;