The Division Bench of the Delhi High Court in the case of Suresh Kumar vs CP & Ors. consisting of Chief Justice Satish Chandra Sharma and Justice Subramonium Prasad held that if Police Personnel break the law, they must be dealt with iron hands.
Facts
The Petitioner before this Court was an employee serving on the post of Head Constable in the services of Delhi Police and was posted at Terminal 2 of the Indira Gandhi International (IGI) Airport. During a surprise visit conducted by the Deputy Commissioner of Police (DCP)/ IGI Airport, a search was carried out in the presence of ASI Jagmal Singh, wherein 75 Dirhams were recovered from the petitioner’s pocket.
Procedural History
An Enquiry Officer was appointed in the matter and after meticulous examination of the witnesses, the charges stood established and an order of dismissal regarding the petitioner and ASI was passed. An Appeal was preferred in the matter which was dismissed by the Commissioner of Police. The Petitioner being aggrieved by the order of punishment and the order passed by the Disciplinary Authority filed an Original Application the Ld. Central Administrative Tribunal, which was dismissed. Hence, this petition.
Contentions Made
Petitioner: It was contended that there was no evidence of demanding and accepting bribe, and in absence of an eyewitness to the demand and acceptance of a bribe, and absence of evidence from the person from whom the money was allegedly extorted, it could not be said that any misconduct occurred at the behest of the Petitioner. Moreover, since the person who was allegedly extorted was not called by the Enquiry Officer, the entire procedure adopted in the matter was bad in law.
Observations of the Court
The Bench opined that by no stretch of imagination could it be said that this was a case of no evidence. 75 Dirhams were recovered from the Petitioner at the time when the search took place and the Petitioner was certainly not a traveller who came from some foreign country, thereby being in possession of Dirhams. Moreover, based on the enquiry report, no satisfactory explanation was provided by him for possession of the same at the time of search and seizure.
It noted that in a Departmental Enquiry, misconduct must be proved based on preponderance of probability. It opined that if the custodian of law himself breaks it, he must be dealt with iron hands. So, no other punishment except dismissal could have been inflicted upon him. Hence, it did not find any reason to interfere with the order.
Relying on a plethora of cases, it further opined that the scope of interference in departmental enquiry is quite limited. Such interference can be done only in case of violation of principles of natural justice and fairplay, or if the findings arrived at are based on no evidence/ perverse findings.
Judgment
The Bench did not find any reason to interfere with the order passed by the Disciplinary Authority, the Appellate Authority as well as the order passed by the CAT and dismissed this petition accordingly.
Case: Suresh Kumar vs CP & Ors.
Citation: W.P.(C) 7245/2003
Bench: Chief Justice Satish Chandra Sharma, Justice Subramonium Prasad
Decided on: 9th November 2022
Read Judgment @Latestlaws.com
Picture Source :
