TAPEN SEN, J. - (1.) HEARD Mr. P.P.N. Roy, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Shekhar Sinha, learned counsel for the respondent No. 5 namely Smt. Shanti Devi and Mr. Rajeev Ranjan Mishra, learned G.P. - II who appears for the respondent Nos. 1 to 4.
(2.) THE petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 15.01.1999 passed by the respondent No. 2 (Commandant, Bihar Military Police - 04, Bokaro Steel City) as contained at Annexure - 5, whereby and whereunder, the petitioner was dismissed from service. The petitioner further prays for a direction upon the authorities to reinstate him in service. The short facts which are necessary to be taken note of for purposes of adjudication of this case are that the petitioner was initially appointed as a Constable in the Bihar Military Police, Bokaro in 1986. His wife namely the respondent No. 5 (Smt. Shanti Devi), filed a complaint alleging bigamy and cruelty and accordingly demanded maintenance. On the basis of such a complaint having been made, the petitioner received a chargesheet dated 02.11.1996 as contained at Annexure - 1 wherein the petitioner was informed that he had committed misconduct on account of having married for the second time during the lifetime of the first wife and that too, without having obtained permission from the Government and that he was not maintaining his wife. Having received the aforementioned notice, the petitioner filed his cause vide Annexure -2 wherein he refuted the charges brought against him. In the said reply/cause, he categorically stated that he had only one wife. Thereafter, by Annexure -3, yet another charge was served upon the petitioner wherein while referring to the reply filed by the petitioner, it was stated that the charge leveled against him had been found to be established. It appears that, thereafter, an inquiry was conducted and a report to that effect was also filed and the Inquiry Officer who submitted his report whereafter comments were given by the Inquiry Officer holding the petitioner to be guilty of the charges. Thereafter, the petitioner was served with a notice to show cause against the proposal to dismiss him from the service and finally, the impugned order dated 15.01.1999 was passed. At Paragraphs 18 and 19, the Writ Petition has stated that his wife had filed an application under Section 125 of Cr PC, before the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, at Bhabhua which was registered as Miscellaneous Case No. 9/1998. In the said application, she also filed a petition subsequently compromising the matter vide Annexure -6 appended to the Writ Application. According to the petitioner, on the basis of the aforesaid compromise petition, the learned Judicial Magistrate dismissed the maintenance application vide Order dated 10.12.1998. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, in view of the compromise, the charge of bigamy will be deemed to have been obliterated and therefore, the order of dismissal needs to be modified.
(3.) A counter affidavit has been filed by the respondent Nos. 2 to 4 wherein they have stated that the petitioner, is not entitled to any relief inasmuch as during the lifetime of his first wife he married again without sanction of the appropriate authority in violation of Rule 707(A) of the Police Manual, as also in violation of Rule 23 of the Government Servants Conduct Rules. These respondents have further stated that against the order of dismissal, the petitioner had also filed a representation before the D.I.G. Military Police which was also rejected on 14.04.1999 and thereafter, the petitioner had also filed an appeal before the Additional Director and without waiting for the result of the appeal, the petitioner should not have filed the instant Writ Application. The respondents have further justified the passing of the order of the dismissal and they have stated at paragraph 10, that neither the compromise petition nor the dismissal of the maintenance application filed by her can affect the charges framed for departmental action.;