Ananta Bora vs The State Of Assam And 2 Ors
2021 Latest Caselaw 864 Gua

                                                                      Page No.# 1/3

GAHC010038762021




                              THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
   (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

                                 Case No. : WP(C)/1457/2021

            ANANTA BORA
            S/O LATE ROJONI KT. BORA, R/O VILL. KAMARBANDHA, P.O. AND P.S.
            KAMARBANDHA, DIST. GOLAGHAT, ASSAM.



            VERSUS

            THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 2 ORS
            REPRESENTED BY THE SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, FOREST AND
            ENVIRONMENTAL DEPTT., ASSAM, SECRETARIAT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI
            781006

            2:PRINCIPAL CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS AND HEAD OF FORESTS
            FORCE

             ASSAM
             PANJABARI
             GUWAHATI 781037

            3:CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS

             EASTERN ASSAM CIRCLE
             JORHAT
             ASSAM

Advocate for the Petitioner   : MR. R PHUKAN

Advocate for the Respondent : SC, FOREST
                                                                                    Page No.# 2/3

                                  BEFORE
                HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA

                                           ORDER

08.03.2021

Heard Mr. R. Phukan, learned counsel for the petitioner, who submits that the petitioner who was working as a Forest Guard, was convicted under Section 6 of the POCSO Act 2012 and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 10 (ten) years with a fine of Rs.10,000/-, in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 1 (one) year, vide judgment and order dated 09.02.2018 passed in Sessions Case No.23/2013 (G.R. Case No.2025/2013).

2. On an appeal filed by the petitioner, which was registered as Criminal Appeal No.18/2015, this Court vide judgment and order dated 09.02.2018 modified the conviction of the petitioner from Section 6 of the POCSO Act to Section 8 of the POCSO Act. The sentence imposed on the petitioner under Section 8 the POCSO Act 2012 was simple imprisonment for the period which the petitioner had already undergone in jail. The petitioner's counsel submits that the petitioner had already undergone 4 (four) years of incarceration inside the jail, at the time when judgment and order dated 09.02.2018 was passed in Criminal Appeal No.18/2015. The petitioner's counsel submits that the respondent no.2 thereafter issued the impugned order dated 12.08.2016, dismissing the petitioner from service in pursuance to the judgment and order dated 05.11.2014 passed by the Sessions Court, Golaghat in Sessions Case No.23/2013 (G.R. Case No.2025/2013), convicting and sentencing the petitioner under Section 6 of the POCSO Act. He also submits that the respondents have not taken any decision with regard to payment of service benefits of the petitioner during the period the petitioner was in service.

3. Mr. A. Barua appearing for Mr. P.N. Goswami, learned counsel for the respondents submits that no representation has been filed by the petitioner and if a representation is filed by the petitioner, the same will be considered by the authorities.

Page No.# 3/3

4. On considering the fact that the impugned order dated 12.08.2016 passed by the respondent no.2 has been made in pursuance to the judgment and order dated 05.11.2014 passed by the Sessions Court, Golaghat in Sessions Case No.23/2013 (G.R. Case No.2025/2013) under Section 6 of the POCSO Act, 2012, this Court is of the view that the respondents should decide the course of action to be taken in pursuance to the judgment and order dated 09.02.2018 passed by this Court in Criminal Appeal No.18/2015, inasmuch as, the judgment and order dated 05.11.2014 passed by the Sessions Court, Golaghat in Sessions Case No.23/2013 (G.R. Case No.2025/2013) has been modified and the petitioner was subsequently convicted under Section 8 of the POCSO Act, 2012. Further, no decision has been taken by the respondent authority, with regard to the payment of service benefits to the petitioner for the period he was in service.

5. As no representation has been submitted by the petitioner, the petitioner is given the liberty to file a representation to the respondent no.2 with regard to his grievance. In the event a representation is submitted by the petitioner, the same shall be examined and a decision taken by the respondent authorities, within a period of 6 (six) weeks from the date to receipt of a certified copy of this order which will be accompanied by a copy of the writ petition. The respondent authorities, while considering the petitioner's representation, should keep in mind the fact that the order dated 12.08.2016 passed by the respondent no.2 had been made in terms of the judgment and order dated 05.11.2014 passed by the Sessions Court, Golaghat in Sessions Case No.23/2013 (G.R. Case No.2025/2013), which has been modified by the judgment and order dated 09.02.2018 passed in Criminal Appeal No.18/2015.

6. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant