Uttarakhand High Court
WPSB/531/2024 on 4 September, 2024
Author: Pankaj Purohit
Bench: Manoj Kumar Tiwari, Pankaj Purohit
2024:UHC:6351-DB
Office Notes,
reports, orders
or proceedings
SL.
Date or directions COURT'S OR JUDGE'S ORDERS
No.
and Registrar's
order with
Signatures
WPSB No.531 of 2024
Hon'ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.
Hon'ble Pankaj Purohit, J.
1. Mr. Pooran Singh Bisht, learned
Addl. C.S.C. for State/petitioner.
2. State has filed this writ petition
challenging the judgment dated
28.03.2023 passed by Uttarakhand
Public Services Tribunal in Claim Petition
no.13/NB/SB/2021. By the said
judgment, claim petition filed by
respondent challenging the adverse entry
recorded by S.S.P., Nainital in
petitioner's ACR on 17.11.2020 and also
the order dated 17.02.2021 passed by
Deputy Inspector General of Police,
Kumaun Range were set aside and the
claim petition filed by respondent was
allowed.
3. It transpires that S.S.P., Nainital
gave adverse entry to respondent in
respect of an incident in which an
accused person, arrested for some
offence, escaped from the police station
while he was being taken to toilet from
police station Mukhani. The said accused
person was subsequently nabbed,
however respondent was held
responsible for the incident and adverse
entry was recorded against him. He
made representation against adverse
2024:UHC:6351-DB
entry, which was rejected by Deputy
Inspector General, Kumaun Range vide
order dated 17.02.2021. Challenging the
orders passed by S.S.P and D.I.G.,
respondent filed claim petition, which
was allowed by learned Tribunal by the
impugned judgment.
4. Perusal of the impugned judgment
reveals that learned Tribunal has
considered and discussed all relevant
aspects in great detail. Para 7 & 8 of
impugned judgments are reproduced
below:-
"7. In view of the above discussion, the
Tribunal finds that in the morning of
02.07.2020, one accused Pawan Kumar raised
the voice or alarm to go for toilet, but no
bathroom or toilet facility was available in
lockup at the police station Mukhani was fled
from the police custody from police station
Mukhani, Haldwani. When the accused
repeatedly asked him to go to the toilet, at
about 04.50, the petitioner took the accused
in handcuffs with the help of a mobile phone
to the toilet located near the police station
gate. While doing toilet, the accused suddenly
overturned and pushed the petitioner, on
which the petitioner immediately tried to nab
him, but accused ran away taking his hand
from the handcuffs. On the basis of
preliminary inquiry, it was found that the
accused Pawan Kumar Kushwaha was
handcuffed to the main gate of the police
station premises with the help of mobile light
due to lack of electricity at that time. The
petitioner without any delay informed to
Thana. The petitioner attempted to catch the
accused which is recorded in CCTV cameras.
The accused was caught at the Damuadhunga
area on 02.07.2020 at day time. All real facts
were disclosed by the petitioner before the
enquiry officer which is also mentioned in the
enquiry report. It is true that the toilet or
bathroom facility was not available in Thana
lock-up; whenever the petitioner took the
accused in handcuffs with the help of a mobile
2024:UHC:6351-DB
phone to the toilet located near the police
station gate. The accused suddenly
overturned and pushed the petitioner, on
which the petitioner immediately tried to nab
him, but accused ran away taking his hand
from the handcuffs. On the basis of
preliminary inquiry, it was found that the
accused Pawan Kumar Kushwaha was
handcuffed to the main gate of the police
station premises with the help of mobile light
due to lack of electricity at the time of
incident. The petitioner without any delay
informed to Thana. It is relevant that the
petitioner attempted to catch the accused
which is recorded in CCTV cameras. The
accused was caught at the Damuadhunga
area on 02.07.2020 at day time. The
preliminary inquiry officer also in his finding
recorded that:
^^;|fi fnukad 02-07-2020 dh izkr% le; djhc 04%50 cts
Fkkuk eq[kkuh ij fctyh uk gksus ds nkSjku vfHk;qDr iou
dq"kokgk vU/ksjs dk ykHk mBkdj y?kq"kadk ds cgkus fuxjkuh
M~;wVh ij fu;qfDr dkfu0 672 uk0iq0 xqy"ku fxjh dks /kDdk
nsdj Hkkxus esa lQy jgkA iqfyl vfHkj{kk ls Qjkj vfHk;qDr
ds fo:) Fkkuk eq[kkuh ij vfHk;kstu iathd`r dj mls mlh
fnu iqfyl }kjk fxj¶rkj fd;k tk pqdk gS ftl nkSjku dks
vfiz; ?kVuk Hkh ?kfVr ugha gqbZ vfHk;qDr ds Qjkj gksus ds
lanks'k ,oa tku cwtdj fdlh i{k dks ykHk vFkok gkfu dkfjr
djus dk dksbZ vk"k; iqfyl dfeZ;ksa dks izrhr ugha gksrk gSA^^
8. In view of the above, the Tribunal finds
that the accused Pawan Kumar raised the
voice or alarm to go for toilet, but there was
no bathroom or toilet facility available in
lockup at the police station Mukhani and at
about 04.50, the petitioner took the accused
in handcuffs with the help of a mobile phone
light due to lack of electricity at that time, to
the toilet, located near the police station gate.
The accused took the benefit of darkness and
toilet, suddenly overturned and pushed the
petitioner, on which the petitioner
immediately tried to nab him, but accused ran
away taking his hand from the handcuffs. The
petitioner attempted to catch the accused
which is recorded in CCTV cameras. The
petitioner immediately informed about this
incident to Thana and the accused was caught
at the Damuadhunga area on 02.07.2020 at
day time by the police. The petitioner took the
accused to toilet near the gate because there
was no facility of toilet in the lockup. It was
2024:UHC:6351-DB
just an unintentional incident and there was
no intention of the petitioner to favour or
disfavour to the accused. Hence, the
impugned orders have been passed without
taking into consideration the circumstances
that had occurred at the time of incident.
Hence, the impugned orders are liable to be
quashed and the claim petition is liable to be
allowed.
5. We concur with the view taken by
learned Tribunal. The respondent took
reasonable care while taking the accused
person to the toilet as is reflected from
the CCTV footage of the incident, which
was taken note of by learned Tribunal. In
the preliminary inquiry report, respondent
was given clean chit. Learned Tribunal
has rightly held that it was an
unintentional incident, for which
respondent alone cannot be penalised. It
has come on record that respondent
suffered injuries on being pushed by the
accused person. Moreover, the accused
person was arrested the same day.
6. Thus, we do not find any reason to
interfere with the judgment rendered by
learned Tribunal. The writ petition thus
fails and is dismissed. No order as to
cost.
(Pankaj Purohit, J.)(Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.)
04.09.2024
Arti
ARTI SINGH
DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF
UTTARAKHAND,
2.5.4.20=487ed955e722ba65aab55409e686c12fb83a19325e8b66890
fbee418e7b69c0d, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND,
serialNumber=26DC90E00D839E3E8714131F235087D2D87E133C57E
7F4A7B2E734BE2521F982, cn=ARTI SINGH
Date: 2024.09.05 11:07:55 +05'30'
2024:UHC:6351-DB
2024:UHC:6351-DB
