Patna High Court
Ranjeet Kumar vs The State Of Bihar on 13 December, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.11097 of 2019
======================================================
Ranjeet Kumar son of Late Ravindra Prasad Sah R/o- Village- Nawagrahi,
P.S.- Muffasil, Near KaliMandir, District- Munger.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Director General of Police, Old Secretariat,
Bihar, Patna.
2. The Inspector General of Police, Bhagalpur Range, Bhagalpur.
3. The Deputy Inspector General of Police, Bhagalpur Range, Bhagalpur.
4. The Senior Superintendent of Police, Bhagalpur.
5. The Deputy Superintendent of Police-cum- Conducting Officer 1st,
Bhagalpur.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Raju Giri, Advocate
: Mr. Santosh Kumar Mishra, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Manish Kumar, GP 4
: Mr. Ajay Kumar, AC to GP 4
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. B. BAJANTHRI
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 13-12-2021
In the instant petition, petitioner has prayed for following
relief/reliefs:
"(i) The Appellate Order No. 519 dated 11.05.2019 issued
by Deputy Inspector General of Police, Bhagalpur be set-aside
whereby and whereunder the Appeal preferred by the
Petitioner has been rejected.
(ii) The impugned Order dated 05.03.2019 passed by the
DGP, Police, rejecting the Appeal Memorial preferred by the
petitioner be set-aside.
(iii) The enquiry report dated 29.12.2017 submitted by the
Deputy Superintendent of Police cum Conduction Officer be
set-aside.
(iv) Respondent Authorities be directed to reinstate the
petitioner on the post of constable with all consequential
benefits."
Patna High Court CWJC No.11097 of 2019 dt.13-12-2021
The alleged allegations levelled against the petitioner is that
petitioner and four others were stated to have demanded/accepted
illegal gratification from the truck drivers at Toll Plaza, Vikramshila
Bridge at Bhaglpur on 15.06.2017. The same was stated to have been
video recorded. Based on video recording on 15.06.2017, a report
was submitted on 16.11.2017 that the petitioner was also involved in
the alleged demand and acceptance of illegal gratification from the
truck drivers. Arising out of the aforesaid facts and circumstances
disciplinary proceedings were lodged against the petitioner and
others. The enquiry was concluded in imposition of penalty of
dismissal from service by the Disciplinary Authority on 13.03.2018.
Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the order of the Disciplinary
Authority petitioner preferred an appeal before the Appellate
Authority on 06.04.2018 and it was rejected by the Appellate
Authority on 11.05.2018. Hence the present petition.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that there is no
evidence relating to demand and acceptance of illegal gratification
by the petitioner as is evident from video recording and it is a part
and parcel of enquiry proceedings, therefore, imposition of penalty
of dismissal from service would be too harsh and disproportionate to
the alleged involvement in demand and acceptance of illegal
gratification from the truck drivers. The Appellate Authority has also
not apprised the aforesaid facts. It is further submitted that the
Patna High Court CWJC No.11097 of 2019 dt.13-12-2021
petitioner during his twenty years of service, he has earned 6 awards
therefore, order of Disciplinary Authority and Appellate Authority
are liable to be set aside.
Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent resisted the
aforesaid contention and submitted no doubt there is no material
evidence in respect of demand and acceptance of illegal gratification
as is evident from the video recording, at the same time, he was
involved with others in respect of demand and acceptance of illegal
gratification at Toll Plaza, Vikramshila Bridge, Bhagalpur on
15.06.2017. It is further submitted that petitioner was punished with
10 minor penalties and 2 major penalties during his twenty years of
service. In the light of these facts and circumstances, the petitioner
has not made out a case so as to interfere with the Disciplinary and
Appellate Authorities orders.
Heard learned counsels for the respective parties.
Petitioner was subjected to disciplinary proceedings in
framing of charge sheet on 13.09.2017 by appointing the Deputy
Superintendent of Police, Bhagalpur as Inquiry Officer. It was
concluded in imposition of penalty of dismissal from service on
13.03.2018 and further appeal was rejected on 11.05.2018. Hence
the present petition.
Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the alleged allegation
is relating to demand and acceptance of illegal gratification which
Patna High Court CWJC No.11097 of 2019 dt.13-12-2021
was to be proved with reference to video recording dated 15.06.2017
in the disciplinary proceedings. Insofar as petitioner is concerned,
there is no material information or video clipping that petitioner was
demanded and accepted illegal gratification and the same has not
been disputed by the official respondents. Therefore, what is
required to be taken note of is only the involvement of the petitioner
with others in respect of demand and acceptance of illegal
gratification. When the official respondents have not disputed
involvement of the petitioner directly in respect of demand and
acceptance of illegal gratification to the truck drivers, in such an
event imposition of major penalty like dismissal from service would
be too harsh and the same has not been apprised by the Appellate
Authority.
Having regard to the alleged charge read with the material
evidence and imposition of penalty of dismissal from service and its
acceptance by the Appellate Authority shocks the conscious of this
Court insofar as imposition of major penalty of dismissal from
service and the same has not been appreciated by the Appellate
Authority. No doubt the petitioner was punished with 10 minor
penalties and 2 major penalties, at the same time he has been
awarded on 6 occasions. These things are required to be taken note
of by the disciplinary authority before imposition of penalty after a
due notice to the petitioner herein. In the light of these facts and
Patna High Court CWJC No.11097 of 2019 dt.13-12-2021
circumstances this Court is only interfering with the penalty of
dismissal and Appellate Authority's order that imposition of penalty
and its confirmation is too harsh having regard to absence of
material evidence that he had demanded and accepted the illegal
gratification.
Accordingly, Annexure 8 dated 11.05.2018 stands set aside.
Disciplinary Authority is hereby directed to re-examine the entire
material and proceed to impose penalty other than dismissal,
removal and compulsory retirement. It is made clear that petitioner is
not entitled to monetary benefits during the intervening period from
the date of dismissal till passing of fresh penalty order read with
reinstatement order.
With the above observation petition stands disposed off.
The Disciplinary Authority is hereby directed to pass fresh
order within a period of three months from the date of receipt of this
order.
(P. B. Bajanthri, J)
GAURAV S./-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE NA
Uploading Date 17.12.2021
Transmission Date NA
