Chander Singh vs Union Of India And Others
2025 Latest Caselaw 469 UK

Uttarakhand High Court

Chander Singh vs Union Of India And Others on 2 June, 2025

Author: Ravindra Maithani

Bench: Ravindra Maithani

     HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
                 Writ Petition No. 847 of 2025 (S/S)

Chander Singh                                          ..........Petitioner
                                      Vs.
Union of India and others                         ............. Respondents
Present :   Ms. Prabha Naithani, Advocate for the petitioner.
            Mr. Lalit Sharma, Standing Counsel for              the   Union   of
            India/respondent nos.1 to 3.

                                JUDGMENT

Hon'ble Ravindra Maithani, J. (Oral)

By means of the instant petition, the petitioner seeks

reinstatement of his services as Sepoy/GD in the Central Reserve

Police Force ("CRPF").

2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the

record.

3. The petitioner was recruited as Sepoy in CRPF in the

year 2005. In the year 2014, an FIR No.9 of 2014, under Sections

498-A/34, 304-B/34, 302/34 IPC has been lodged against him at

Police Station Satpuli, District Pauri Garhwal. The petitioner was

arrested in the matter and subsequently, he was suspended by an

order dated 26.09.2014. Based on the FIR, a Sessions Trial No.03

of 2015, State vs. Chandra Singh and others, was instituted in the

court of the District and Sessions Judge, Kotdwar, District Pauri

Garhwal, which was decided on 25.10.2016 and the petitioner was

convicted and sentenced. Thereafter, an appeal was preferred

against it, which was also dismissed and according to the

petitioner, the SLP was also dismissed on 11.01.2018. In the

meanwhile, the services of the petitioner were terminated on

18.04.2017. Now, the petitioner seeks that he may be reinstated in

the service.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that

the petitioner could not prefer an appeal against the order dated

18.04.2017 terminating his services because the petitioner was in

prison. Therefore, now he may be reinstated.

5. The petitioner was terminated from the services on

18.04.2017. It is almost after 08 years, instant petition has been

filed. The petitioner has not preferred an appeal against the order

terminating his service. The petitioner is admittedly, a convict.

Therefore, this Court is of the view that there is no reason to

interfere in the writ petition. Accordingly, the petition deserves to be

dismissed at the stage of admission itself.

6. The petition is dismissed in limine.

(Ravindra Maithani, J.) 02.06.2025 Sanjay