Hariram vs Union Of India
2021 Latest Caselaw 9 Raj

(1 of 2) [CW-12753/2020]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 12753/2020

Hariram S/o Shri Mala Ram Ji, Aged About 61 Years, R/o Village Dhamniya, Post Baggad, Tehsil Merta City, District Nagaur, Rajasthan.

----Petitioner Versus

1. Union Of India, Through The Secretary, Ministry Of Home Affairs, Government Of India, New Delhi.

2. Directorate General, Border Security Force, Block No. 10, 5Th Floor, Cgo Complex, Lodhi Road, New Delhi.

3. Deputy Inspector General, Administrative Directorate (Pension And Complaint Redressal Cell), Force Head Quarter, Border Security Force, Block No. 11, Cgo Complex, Lodhi Road, New Delhi.

4. Inspector General, Border Security Force, Head Quarters, Rajasthan Frontier, Mandore Road, Jodhpur, Rajasthan.

                                                                ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)        :     Dr. Nupur Bhati (through VC)
For Respondent(s)        :



             HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN BHANSALI

                                    Order

04/01/2021

This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner aggrieved

against the order dated 05.10.2006 (Annex.7) passed by the

respondent reducing the rank of the petitioner to Constable and

order dated 16.12.2006 (Annex.8) passed by the Commandant

dismissing the petitioner on account of his conviction for an

offence under Section 302 IPC by the judgment dated 27.02.2004

passed by the Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track), Parbatsar,

District Nagaur.

(2 of 2) [CW-12753/2020]

The grievance of the petitioner is that despite repeated

representations being made by the petitioner for reinstatement on

account of the fact that sentence of the petitioner had been

suspended in D.B. Cr. Appeal No.376/2004 by order dated

13.05.2004 before passing of the impugned orders, the petitioner

has not been reinstated.

Admittedly, the appeal filed by the petitioner against his

conviction is still pending consideration before this Court and as

only the sentence has been suspended and not the conviction, the

prayer made by the petitioner on account of the sentence having

been suspended appears to be misplaced.

As the orders impugned have been passed on account of the

conviction of the petitioner, it is only as a result of the pending

appeal that the consequences would follow i.e. in case, the

petitioner is acquitted by the appellate court, then only the

petitioner can have a cause qua the orders passed, based on the

conviction, as such the present relief claimed is premature.

In view thereof, the writ petition filed by the petitioner for

the relief claimed cannot be entertained, the same is, therefore,

dismissed, leaving it open for the petitioner to take appropriate

proceedings once the pending appeal against the conviction is

decided.

(ARUN BHANSALI),J

42-Rmathur/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)