SUMAR PURI Vs. STATE OF J & K, DESH K.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a letters Patent appeal directed against the judgment of the Honourable Chief Justice Ali, sitting singly dated July 10, 1972 by which he dismissed the writ petition which had been filed by the petitioner appellant.

(2.) The relevant facts which have given rise to this present appeal briefly stated are as follows:- The present appellant at the relevant point of time was admittedly an Assistant Engineer and he was in charge of the construction of a road called Kaluchak-Parmandal Road, Jammu, On Oct. 24, 1967 Rawal Singh (P.W. 1) accompanied by Balmukand (P.W. 4) Village level worker of Bari-Brahamina, lodged a complaint before the Superintendent of Police, Anti-Corruption Organization, alleging therein that the permanent daily labourers of Kaluchak-Purmandal Road were engaged by the appellant Shri Puri at his house in Gandhi Nagar, Jammu in connection with its construction. It was also alleged that the labourers had been working there for the last 7 or 8 days but their presence was being shown in the muster-sheets maintained in respect of the working of the Kaluchak-Purmandal Road. The Superintendent of Police, Anti-corruption Organisation (briefly stated here-after as 'ACO') forwarded the complaint to the Deputy Superintendent of Police, ACO for preliminary enquiry and report. Shri A. G. Gupta (P.W. 7) on being so directed by the Superintendent of Police, visited a house situate at Gandhi Nagar, Jammu, along-with Rawal Singh and Balmukand. According to the complaint this house belonged to the appellant Shri Puri. The Deputy Superintendent of Police went to the aforesaid house and there he found about 20 labourers including 11 labourers of Kaluchak-Purmandal Road present, and also the co-accused Shri Ramchand Work Mistry who was also charge-sheeted alongwith the appellant, present at that house at that time. The Deputy Superintendent of Police made an enquiry from the labourers who were working in the house and he came to know that the house belonged to the appellant, and that Ramchand mentioned above was supervising the construction. The Deputy Superintendent of Police also in the course of the enquiry seized the muster-sheet of the labourers and it is said that on a scrutiny of the same, it was found that on this date in question although the labourers were working in a house at Gandhi Nagar, Jammu, but their attendance had been marked in the muster-sheets showing that they were actually on work on the Kaluchak-Purmandal Road, which was under the supervision and in the charge of the appellant. The Deputy Superintendent of Police ACO after the preliminary enquiry submitted a report to the Superintendent of Police, ACO and requested that formal permission for the investigation of the case from the Anti-corruption Commission (hereinafter referred to as 'the Commission' may be obtained. After the necessary permission was granted by the Commission to the investigating agency, the later after concluding the investigation submitted a report to the Commission and the Commission after having considered the report drew up articles of charge against the present appellant. The charge drawn against the appellant is an under:-

(3.) The defence of the appellant was firstly that the labourers had absented themselves and they were working in a house belonging to Tej Ram Mahajan, secondly it was urged on behalf of the appellant that this complaint was at the instance of Bahajan Singh (P.W. 2) who had been discharged by the appellant and having as such a grouse against the appellant he in collusion with his brother Rawal Singh filed a false complaint against him. Thirdly it was urged on behalf of the appellant that Ramchand Mistry was on leave and the question of his supervising a construction work did not arise and fourthly that entries had been forcibly made and manipulated at the instance of the Deputy Superintendent of Police, ACO in the muster sheets.