State Of Gujarat vs Dharmendrarao Prataprao Pawar
2021 Latest Caselaw 5735 Guj

     C/LPA/417/2021                                    ORDER DATED: 09/06/2021




           IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

              R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 417 of 2021
           In R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 7844 of 2020
                                With
              CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR STAY) NO. 1 of 2021
             In R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 417 of 2021
==========================================================
                     STATE OF GUJARAT & 3 other(s)
                               Versus
                  DHARMENDRARAO PRATAPRAO PAWAR
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR DHAWAL JAYSWAL, ASSISTANT GOVERNMENT PLEADER(1) for the
Appellant(s) No. 1,2,3,4
MR VAIBHAV A VYAS(2896) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================

 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.M.CHHAYA
        and
        HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIRZAR S. DESAI

                         Date : 09/06/2021
                          ORAL ORDER

(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.M.CHHAYA)

Order in Appeal:-

Heard Mr. Dhawal Jayswal, learned Assistant Government Pleader for the appellants and Mr. Vaibhav A. Vyas, learned advocate for the respondent.

ADMIT. Mr. Vaibhav A. Vyas, learned advocate waives service of notice of admission on behalf of the respondent.

Order in Civil Application:-

1. Heard Mr. Dhawal Jayswal, learned Assistant Government Pleader for the applicants and Mr. Vaibhav A. Vyas, learned advocate for the opponent.

C/LPA/417/2021 ORDER DATED: 09/06/2021

Mr. Vaibhav A. Vyas, learned advocate waives service of Rule on behalf of the opponent.

2. The impugned order is based on the fact that other two Constables - Bholabhai Mohanbhai Vaghela, Unarmed Head Constable and Maheshbhai Mehra, Unarmed Police Constable were similarly charged for having talked to the accused person for the same incident and FIR and were initially dismissed from service. However, their order of dismissal from service was substituted with punishment of stoppage of one increment for one year without future effect and therefore, the opponent should also be given similar treatment. Record indicates that during pendency of the petition, the revisional authority was directed to decide the issue again. Though Mr. Vyas contended that other two Constables had also talked with Bootlegger, on perusal of the finding of fact arrived at by the revisional authority in order dated 8.7.2020 which is at Annexure-K in the paper book at Page-113, serious allegations are leveled against the opponent and prima facie, this Court is of the opinion that the learned Single Judge ought to have examined it in detail instead of giving benefit of similar nature which is accorded to other two Constables. More so, there is nothing to show in the order, wherein any such comparison is analyzed.

3. In view of the aforesaid therefore, in facts of this case, the applicants have prima facie

C/LPA/417/2021 ORDER DATED: 09/06/2021

established the case against the opponent who is working in the police force and considering the allegations, the same cannot be brushed aside without proper analysis and examination and hence, during pendency of this appeal, the impugned judgment and order deserves to be stayed and is hereby stayed. It would be open for the parties to request the Court for early hearing of the appeal.

4. Accordingly, the Civil Application is allowed in the above terms. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent.

(R.M.CHHAYA, J)

(NIRZAR S. DESAI,J) MRP