September 23, 2018:

The enquiry officer acted with a pre-determined mind so as to hold them guilty, Bench observed.

Division Bench of Delhi High Court of Justices Hima Kohli and Rekha Palli  dealt with a case whereunder the appeals filed by them against the penalty of permanent forfeiture of one year approved service with proportionate reduction in pay, were not only rejected but the penalty imposed on them was enhanced from a period of one year to three years.

The matter was of the petitioners, both Constables (Executive) working with the Delhi Police, who were posted at Police Station Mandawali, where one Sub-Inspector (SI) Badruddin was their superior officer.

On 11.01.2003, the petitioners alongwith one Constable Kewal Singh, while working as members of the Special Staff of Police Station Mandawali, had accompanied SI Badruddin for investigating FIR No.17/2003, lodged under Section 38 Indian Penal Code, 1860, for which purpose they had visited the shop of one Mohd. Shaid alongwith two informers, Guddu and Pappu.

Mohd. Shaid and his employee, Mr. Banwari Lal were brought to the Police Station and were released after about two to three hours. On 14.01.2003, on the statements made by the complainant, Mohd. Shaid and his brother-in-law Mobin Khan, a preliminary enquiry was initiated against the petitioners as also against Constable Kewal Singh and SI Badruddin with an allegation that they beat them mercilessly.

They took Rs.10,000 as a bribe and relieved them in midnight on 12.01.2003, they did not make any DD entry in the Roznameha of PS Mandawali in this regard.

The aforesaid enquiry resulted in the imposition of a penalty of withholding the next increment of the petitioners temporarily for a period of one year.

After several rounds of litigation before CAT and High Court, matter was again taken up by the DB of Delhi High Court. It was observed as under-

''Having examined the evidence led in the enquiry, we have no hesitation in coming to the conclusion that the enquiry officer has acted in a most mechanical and casual manner and the inferences drawn by him were not at all supported by any evidence. It appears that instead of ensuring that his conclusions are based on evidence which would prove the guilt of the petitioners, the enquiry officer acted with a pre-determined mind so as to hold them guilty. In our view for the aforesaid reasons, the enquiry report cannot be sustained and stand vitiated.''

Finally the writ petition is allowed with a direction to the respondents to grant all the consequential benefits to the petitioners within a period of 12 weeks of Judgement.

Enquiry officers in DE shall not act in a mechanical manner just to pass a guilty finding rules DB of HC Read Judgement (Downloadable PDF)

Enquiry Officers in DE Shall Not Act in a Mechanical Manner Just to Pass a Guilty Finding Rules DB of HC Re... by Latest Laws Team on Scribd

Share this Document :

Picture Source :