G. M. LODHA, J. - (1.) IN this writ petition Parmeshwar Swaroop, a civil servant, has prayed that the following relief may be granted to him:- (i)to revote the order of suspension dated 17. 9. 82 retrospectively with effect from 20th March, 1982, (ii)and to pay his full salary and allowances for the entire period from the date of his deemed suspension till the date of the revocation of the order of suspension, after deduction of subsistence allowance already paid to the petitioner.
(2.) PARMESHWAR Swaroop was employed as subject-matter Specialist (Plant protection) Agriculture Officer and posted as such in the office of the District Extension Officer, Rajasthan Canal Project, Suratgarh. A case under Section 302 I. P. C. was registered against him on March 18, 1982 for causing death of none else but his own wife Madhu. He was suspended from service by order dated September 17, 1982 (Annexure-1 ). He along with his father was prosecuted under Section 302, 302/34, 201, 120 B I. P. C. on the allegation that after the marriage with Madhu Saxena, accused Bhagwan Swaroop and PARMESHWAR Swaroop started teasing and harassing PARMESHWAR Swaroop's wife Madhu for dowry on the ground that proper dowry has not been given. There was some litigation also. On March 18, 1982 the dead body of Madhu was found in the house of the accused. Since only the first page and pages 24 and 25 of the judgment have been filled by the learned counsel for the petitioner, it would not be possible to narrate the entire facts, nor the reasons which led to the acquittal. However, the most important feature of this case is that in the operative part of the judgment the learned Sessions Judge, Jaipur City while acquitting the accused has made serious observations against the accused and held that after the marriage the husband and the father-in law harassed Madhu and created such adverse inhuman circumstances in which she virtually was compelled to die and they are morally responsible for her death. It has been mentioned that PARMESHWAR Swarroop filed a petition for judicial separation. Madhu then submitted written apology, but inspite of that PARMESHWAR Swaroop never gave any love or affection to her. Madhu was completely disillusioned and she mentally and physically collapsed as she was not given any affection. The cruelty was so acute that the father-in-law did not allow her to come before him on the ground that he would not like to see her face. The learned Sessions Judge was so much overs helmed with the pitiable condition of the girl Madhu that he observed that the cruel treatment of the husband was of such a heinous nature that she was not treated even like a cattel and inspite of serious agony of the wife, the husband continued to be indifferent and cruel to her. Slowly and slowly Madhu reduced herself to a skeleton and ultimately died, but the husband and father-in-law were so cruel that even her dead body was allowed to remain unattended and nobody bothered about it. It was after many days that the worn, torn, and highly decomposed dead body was found, which exhibits the climax of cruelty, inhumanity, barbarity of the husband and in-laws. The learned Sessions Judge has mentioned that the tell tale of this tragedy is heart rendering and society shocking, nerve breaking. I have extracted the substance of the observations which have been made by the Sessions Judge at the end of the judgment, in order to show that though technically the accused has been acquitted, but the learned Sessions Judge could not resist the deduction or conclusion which he has drawn regarding this tragedy and responsibility of the husband and in-laws in it. Learned counsel submits that since acquittal has been made now, according to the law, re-instatement should be done automatically and this Court should, therefore, issue a mandamus directing the respondents to re-instate him and pay him all back wages and salary. Learned counsel further submitted that this Court is not concerned with the moral aspect of the case, as only legal rights are decided as it is a 'law Court' and not a 'moral Court'. Learned counsel further submitted that he has moved an application before this Court for expunging the remarks and that application has been admitted and the same is pending.
(3.) IN a series of decisions it has been laid down that the jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution is extraordinary and equitable. There are several schools of jurisprudence. Analytical School of Law, where no sociological considerations came into being. The historical concept of law, which consider that law is not made but originates as historical growth on 'sadachara', usage and customs. Yet another school says that the law is the result of a social effort to meet the unsatisfied legitimate but human desires and ambitions. The law thus becomes an instrument of social and economic change. The ethical schools of law believes that law should be based on morality, consideration of right and wrong, moral or immoral. In Gagan Raj SIngh Nagori vs. Union of India (l) a similar submission was made by Mr. SInghvi, who appeared for Railway employee, agaInst whom the charge was of rape agaInst an adult woman In retirIng room, but the charge was not sustaIned and he was acquitted. However, while acquittIng the accused In that case, similar observations were made by the Court. Nagori was then removed from service without any enquiry or charge sheet and he approached this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution. The submission made was that without any enquiry and without any evidence and procedure of departmental enquiry, no removal can be ordered, more so, when acquittal has been done by the CrimInal Court. ;