- (1.) The petitioner who was a member of Rajasthan Police Service has in this writ petition challenged the order dated 26th Sept. 2001 whereby penalty of stoppage of his 50% pension for a period of 10 years was awarded to him. This order of penalty was passed against the petitioner consequent upon his being found guilty of the charges for which he was served with the charge-sheet under Rule 16 of the Rajasthan Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules 1958 (in short the CCA Rules). The petitioner was at the relevant time posted as Deputy Superintending of Police at Pratapgarh. Initially, a memorandum of charge-sheet under Rule 17 of the CCA Rules was issued to him on 3rd April, 1999. Subsequently, this was converted into a charge-sheet under Rule 16 of the Rules of 1958 by order dated 9th May, 2000. During the pendency of inquiry, the petitioner was placed under suspension by order dated 2nd June, 1999. While the inquiry was still on, the petitioner on attaining the age of superannuation eventually retired from service on 28-1-2000.
(2.) There were in all three charges against the petitioner. The first charge against the petitioner was that while working as Deputy Superintendent of Police, Circle Pratapgarh, District Chittorgarh in the year 1999, he misbehaved one lady constable Kumari Bhatt (Belt No. 1355) on 25th March, 1999. He behaved with her in an indecent manner when she was called by him from Police Station, Chittorgarh to be associated in the investigation of FIR No. 45/1999 dated 24-3-1999 for offences under Sections 302, 201/34 IPC lodged with Police Station Salamgarh, District Chittorgarh. The precise charge was that the petitioner took the said lady constable to his official residence with foul motive where she was asked to stay with him alone when none of his family members were there. The charge No. 2 was to the effect that he while working as Dy. Superintendent of Police detained the aforesaid lady constable Kumari Komal Bhatt at his official residence against her wishes and asked her to stay there and threw flower towards her and asked for her consent for making illicit relation on the promise of helping her in future. In substance thus he made advances towards the said lady constable without her consent and much against her wishes. The charge No. 3 against the petitioner was that when the aforesaid lady constable made complaint of this kind of behaviour of the petitioner who was her superior officer, the petitioner sent Shri Kailash Meena, sub-Inspector (Training) to the residence of the lady constable who tried to persuade her and her family to withdraw the complaint and later when they did not agree, tried to threaten them.
(3.) The inquiry in the matter was conducted by Shri R.S. Rajvi, Addl. Commissioner-I, Departmental Inquiries, State of Rajasthan Jaipur. While the department examined 17 witnesses and exhibited 22 documents in support of the charges, the delinquent produced only three defence witnesses. At the conclusion of inquiry, both the parties produced written submissions and made oral arguments too. In so far as charge No. 1 is concerned, the Department produced Rapat No. 25 dated 24-3-1999 and Rapat No. 43 dated 20-3-1999 to prove the departure and arrival of the said lady constable Kumari Komal Bhatt from and to Police Line Chittorgarh. Department also produced Rapat No. 1038 dated 25-3-1999 as Ex.P/3 to prove that the said lady constable accompanied the petitioner from Police Station, Pratapgarh at 10.45 a.m. in the Gypsy wherefrom they went to Police Station, Amod and then the Suhagpura, the place of incident. She throughout the day remained with the petitioner. While returning back, the petitioner himself was driving the Gypsy but instead of taking her to Police Station, Pratapgarh, the petitioner took the Gypsy to his own residence whereas the bag of the lady constable was lying at Police Station, Pratapgarh. The petitioner then forced the lady to stay at his residence and asked her to leave after refreshment. It was during this period that the petitioner made indecent proposal to the lady constable. The lady constable submitted a written complaint to the Addl. Superintendent of Police on 25-3-1999, which was exhibited as Ex.P/9. Initially, preliminary inquiry was conducted by Shri R.B. Mukul, Addl. Superintendent of Police, CID (CB) which is produced as Ex.P/18. Statements recorded during the preliminary inquiry have also been produced in the regular inquiry. Some of the statements which were recorded during regular inquiry, copies of which have been placed on record are worth to notice and they are described in brief in the following paras.;