O. A. No. 289/1997, O.A. No. 420/1997. Case: 1. Ex Head Constable Dev Dutt, 2. Ex Constable Majid Khan Vs 1. Union of India, through Lt. Governor of Delhi, Through Commissioner of Police, Delhi, Police Headquarters, New Delhi, 2. Additional Commissioner of Police (Northern Range), Delhi Police Headquarters, New Delhi, 3. A. K. Patnaik, Additional Deputy Commissioner of Police (Central District), Delhi Police Headquarters, New Delhi, 4. S. B. S. Tyagi, Assistant Commissioner of Police/Karol Bagh, Enquiry Officer, through Dy. Commissioner of Police/HQ(I), New Delhi. Central Administrative Tribunal
| Case Number | O. A. No. 289/1997, O.A. No. 420/1997 |
| Counsel | Ankur Gupta, Renu George, Anil Singal |
| Judges | V. K. Bali (Chairman) & L. K. Joshi (Vice Chairman) |
| Issue | Indian Evidence Act, 1872 |
| Judgement Date | May 31, 2010 |
| Court | Central Administrative Tribunal |
Judgment:
V. K. Bali (Chairman), (Principal Bench, New Delhi)
-
By this common order, we propose to dispose of two connected Original Applications as common questions of law and facts arise therein. Learned counsel representing the parties also suggest likewise. The applicants Dev Dutt and Majid Khan in the two OAs as referred to above faced a joint departmental enquiry with their co-delinquents HC Ajaib Singh and Ct. Shish Ram. All of them were dismissed from Service. Aggrieved, they filed appeal, which found no favour with the appellate authority. Three out of the four persons mentioned above, had filed Original Applications in this Tribunal which were dismissed vide common order dated 29.5.2000. Out of three, the applicants named above filed writ petitions before the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi, which were disposed of by a common order dated 12.10.2009. The High Court was of the view that the Tribunal had not given reasons for arriving at its conclusions and that there was no discussion of facts of the case apart from a broad mention thereof. It was also observed that ordinarily the matter would have been disposed of on merits being considerably old, but inasmuch as, there was challenge to the enquiry proceedings, which, it was urged on behalf of the applicants, were vitiated, the High Court remitted the matter to the Tribunal for reconsidering the issues raised so that they may have benefit of the view of the Tribunal. This is how these two matters have come for decision before us for the second time.
-
This matter came up for hearing before us earlier on 9.3.2010 when arguments were heard and judgment was reserved. While, however, preparing the judgment we observed that it was primarily urged on behalf of the applicants that present was a case of no evidence, but no arguments as to how the enquiry proceedings would be vitiated were advanced. Since it was urged before the High Court that the enquiry proceedings were vitiated, but no arguments had been addressed in that connection, vide order dated 11.3.2010 we gave another chance to the applicants to address arguments on that behalf, and the matter was directed to be listed again on 5.4.2010. Arguments were concluded in this case on 25.5.2010 and the judgment was reserved.
-
The enquiry officer after recording statements of Inspector S. C. Batra, SHO/DBG Road; Shri D. S. Sanga, ACP/Paharganj, and reproducing the statements of Shri Deependra Pathak, Mahabir Prasad and Virendra Nath, which were recorded during preliminary enquiry, by bringing the said statements on record and by virtue of provisions contained in rules 15 and 16 of the Delhi Police (Punishment and Appeal) Rules, 1980 (hereinafter to be referred as the Rules of 1980) and some other evidence, framed the following charges against the applicants and their co-delinquents:
You, HC Ajaib Singh No.102/C and Ct. Majid Khan No.370/C in that while posted at PS DBG Road, were detailed for picket duty at Rani Jhansi Road on 9.6.92, stopped Sh. Mahabir Prasad s/o Ram Avtar Aggarwal r/o 4-F-4 NPH Road, Jodhpur, Rajasthan and his friend Sh. Virendra Nath s/o Ram Nath r/o Chanpasera Road, Jodhpur, Rajasthan at 1.00 PM when they were on their way to hotel Vikrant, Fatehpuri, Delhi after seeing a night show at Liberty Cinema. HC Dev Dutt No.242/C and Ct. shish Ram No.686/C who were detailed for motor cycle patrolling were also present at the picket at that time. Ct. Majid Khan No.370/C took Mahabir Prasad and Virendra Nath inside the police booth at Rani Jhansi Road, New Rohtak Road where Ct. Shish Ram was already sitting inside the booth. They started searching Mahabir Prasad and Virendra Nath and threatened them by saying that they were coming from Kamal Restaurant. During the search Ct. Shish Ram took Rs.4000/- in denomination of Rs.500/- note (8 notes) when they asked for reason as they had not committed any crime the police personnel threatened them that in case they were arrested, they would have to pay Rs.10000/- each for bail and for their release. It is further alleged that after taking Rs.4000/- they were allowed to go. On reaching the Hotel Vikrant Sh. Mahabir Prasad informed the PCR about the incident which was brought to the notice of worthy DCP/C, who directed Sh. Deependra Pathak, IPS, ACP/UT, night G.O. to look into the matter. Sh. Deependra Pathak, IPS, ACP/UT, along with Mahabir Prasad came at the picket at Rani Jhansi Road, P.S. DBG Road where Mahabir Prasad identified HC Ajaib Singh and Ct. Majid Khan. Sh. Deependra Pathak conducted personal search of HC Ajaib Singh and recovered 8 notes of Rs.500/- denomination each from his left pocket and Rs.1600/- were recovered from his other pocket which he could not account for satisfactorily. Subsequently Sh. Deependra Pathak gave message on wireless and called HC Dev Dutt and Ct. Shish Ram in the police station where they were also identified by Sh. Mahabir Prasad. This was a serious and grave misconduct on the part of HC Ajaib Singh No.102/C, Ct. Majid Khan No.370/C, HC Dev Dutt No.242/C and Ct. Shish Ram No.686/C being a member of disciplined force.
The applicants and others were given chance to lead evidence in their defence. They availed the said opportunity and examined some witnesses. They submitted their defence statements on 9.2.1994. By making a very brief mention of the facts and evidence, the enquiry officer concluded as follows:
From the statements of Sh. Virendra Nath PW-2C and Mr. Mahabir Prasad PW-2D it became abundantly clear that Ct. Shish Ram No.686/C had taken away 8 notes of Rs.500/- denomination from the possession of Mr. Mahabir Prasad, when HC Ajaib Singh and Ct. Majid Khan had stopped them at police piekct Rani Jhansi Road - Idgah X-ing for checking purposes.
Ct. Majid Khan No. 370/C had taken Mr. Mahabir Prasad to nearby police booth for carrying personal search of the complainant Mr. Mahabir Prasad and Ct. Shish Ram No.686/C had taken away 8 notes of Rs.500/- denomination from him in the presence of Ct. Majid Khan.
HC Dev Dutt on motorcycle patrolling duty in the area of PS DBG Rd. was standing outside the police booth whereas his rider Ct. Shish Ram No.686/C was conducting the personal search of the complainant Mr. Mahabir Prasad on a flimsy ground.
Rs.4000/- (8 notes of Rs.500/- denomination) was recovered by Sh. Deependra Pathak ACP/UT in the presence of the complainant from the left pocket of the shirt of the HC Ajaib Singh 10/C and was returned to the complainant there only.
The defence witnesses produced by these 4 police personnel don't say anything about the personal search of the complainant and subsequent recovery of the money from the possession of the one of the defaulters. They only say that complainants were saying that they will teach them a lesson since police personnel have harassed them by carrying out checking at the police booth. This doesn't convey any thing and provide no defence to the defaulters in view of the money being recovered from the personal search of the one of the defaulters in the presence of the complainant by Sh. Deependra Pathak ACP/UT.
Under the circumstances it has been established that Ct. Majid Khan and HC Ajaib Singh stopped the complainant at Rani Jhansi Road - Idgah X-ing, Ct. Majid Khan took the complainant Mr. Mahabir Prasad to the police booth, Ct. Shish Ram took the personal search of the complainant Mr. Mahabit Prasad and took away Rs.4000/- from his possession, the same money Rs.4000/- (8 notes of Rs.500/- denomination) was recovered from the personal search of HC Ajaib Singh, where motorcycle patrolling officer HC Dev Dutt kept a general watch outside the police booth and these police personnel individually and collectively took away Rs.4000/- from the personal possession of Mr. Mahabir Prasad in connivance with each other on the false threat of arresting the complainants for which they would have had to spend Rs.10000/- only for getting themselves bailed out.
While accepting the report of the enquiry officer, the disciplinary authority vide order dated 9.4.1994 dismissed all the delinquents from Service. The period of suspension w.e.f. 10.6.1992 to the date of issue of the order was ordered to be treated as not spent on duty. The disciplinary authority while tracing the history of the case up to the applicants and others submitting their representation with reference to the findings of the enquiry officer, while dismissing the applicants from Service, held as follows:
I have gone through the written representations submitted by the defaulters HC Ajaib Singh No.102/C, HC Dev Dutt No.242/C, const. Majid Khan No.370/C and Const. Shish Ram No.686/C with reference to the findings of the E.O. and other documents available on the D.E. file. In the interest of natural justice, they were heard in O.R. They did not state anything apart from what they have submitted in their representations. I have gone through the findings of the Enquiry Officer and the representations of the defaulters. In spite of what all the defaulters do claim in their defence in their representations, during the enquiry and in...
To continue reading
Request your trial