Rambachan Chaudhary v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.1746 of 2022 ====================================================== Rambachan Chaudhary, aged about 37 years, Gender- Male, son of Mantu Choudhary resident of Village- Rampur, Ward No. 03, P.S.- Sonhan, DistrictKaimur (Bhabua). ... ... Petitioner
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar through the Home Commissioner, Bihar, Patna. 2.
The Director General of Police, Bihar, Patna. 3.
The Inspector General of Police Koshi Region, Saharsa, Bihar. 4.
The Deputy Inspector General of Police, Koshi Region, Saharsa, Bihar. 5.
The Superintendent of Police, Supaul.
6.
The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Supaul.
7.
The Enquiry Officer-Cum- Sub Divisional Police Officer, Birpur, Supaul. 8.
The S.H.O. Trieveniganj Police Station, Supaul. ... ... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner :
Mr.Shyam Bihari Singh, Adv.
For the State :
Mr.Md. Nadim Seraj, GP-5 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MADHURESH PRASAD ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 02-12-2022 Today being Friday, matters are being taken up through virtual mode, as per current procedure for hearing.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned State counsel.
3. The petitioner was found to be in an inebriated condition subjected to Breath Analyzer Test and after following procedure of conducting a departmental proceeding, was dismissed from the service of the respondent force. Since the petitioner's earlier writ petition has been disposed of in light of decision in the case of Jawahar Kumar Singh (supra), this Court considers it
2/5 appropriate to reproduce relevant extract of decision of this Court in the case of Jawahar Kumar Singh (supra), which reads as follows:- "12. The power of punishment is always within the employers' discretion and Courts do not normally interfere with where there is no infirmity with the procedure. However, weighing all the factors, viz., the nature of charges against the petitioner, the manner in which it is sought to be proved, no evidence of any past conduct of similar nature and perhaps lack of sensitivity in dealing with the case of the petitioner, this Court feels that the punishment is rather disproportionate. This Court says so for the reason that nothing but pandemonium is said to have been created and that also not during the period when the petitioner was on duty.
This Court is conscious of the fact that the petitioner is an employee of a uniformed service; nonetheless the gravity of the misconduct is not such that he be dismissed from the service. This Court feels that an unduly harsh punishment has been meted out to the petitioner and that also when the charges were sought to be proved in a most rudimentary manner by relying upon the Breath Analyzer report, which report could well be wrong as well.
13.The grossly excessive/disproportionate punishment to them petitioner goads this Court in setting- aside the order of dismissal by the Deputy Inspector General of Police, Eastern Range, Bhagalpur (respondent No. 5) and the order passed in appeal by the Inspector General of Police, Bhagalpur Range, Bhagalpur (respondent No. 4) as well as the order rejecting the Memorial of the petitioner by the Director General of Police, Bihar, Patna (respondent No. 3).
14. The matter is, therefore, remitted to the Deputy Inspector General of Police, Eastern Range, Bhagalpur (respondent No. 5) for writing out a fresh order in accordance with law, taking
3/5 into account whether the petitioner has ever been charged of such offence and whether the charges against him have been conclusively proved and, if so, what would be the commensurate punishment vis-a-vis the nature of charge levelled upon him. The aforesaid order be passed within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order."
4. It was in this light that petitioner's earlier writ proceedings arsing out of CWJC No. 5578 of 2021 (Rambachan Chaudhary vs. The State of Bihar & Others) was disposed on 25-03-2021, by recording the following order:- "Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the aforesaid claim of the petitioner, the present writ application is disposed off with a direction to the respondents to scrutinize the fact and if it is found that the fact of this case is similar to that of C.W.J.C. No. 13549 of 2018 (Jawahar Kumar Singh versus State of Bihar & Ors), same treatment shall be extended to the petitioner by the respondents within a maximum period of two months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order."
5. It is, thus, apparent that the matter was remitted for consideration on the ground of quantum of punishment and specifically with reference to the prior conduct of the petitioner whether he has been charged of any such offence and other such issues. Having considered the issue of quantum of punishment being disproportionate, the Superintendent of Police, Supaul has again passed an order on 20-06-2021, wherein, he has considered the fact that the petitioner has earlier also been found to be guilty
4/5 of certain lapses which have been taken note of. Paragraph Nos. 3 and 4 of the order, which reads as follows:- "3 बक्सर जजिलला में बुजनियलाददी प्रजशिक्षण समलाजपप्ति पशचात्जदनिनांक- 22.12.14 कको 05 (पपाँच) जदनिनों कला अनिबुमजप्ति अवकलाशि पप्तितृक जजिलला सबुपपौल में यकोगदलानि करनिन हनप्तिबु आदनशि पत्र जनिगर्गप्ति जकयला गयला थला। अवकलाशि उपभकोग कर जदनिनांक 28.12.2014 कको यकोगदलानि पबुजलस कनन्द्र सबुपपौल में करनिला थला, परन्प्तिबु जदनिनांक -02.01.2015 कन अपjkg.k में 06 (छ:) जदनि जपछड कर जकए। उक्प्ति बरप्तिदी गयदी ललापरवलाहदी कन जलए ' "कलाम निहहीं प्तिको वनप्तिनि निहहीं " कन आधलार पर 06 (छ:) जदनिनों कला वनप्तिनि भतला tIr करप्तिन हबुए उक्प्ति अवजध कको असलाधलारण अवकलाशि में समलायकोजजिप्ति जकयला गयला हप। सबुपपौल जजिललादनशि स०-37/2015 हप ।
4. थलानिलाध्यक्ष, सबुपपौल कला जलापनांक 4064 जदनिनांक- 14.08.2019 कन आलकोक में गलार्ग प्रभलारदी शिकोजहप्ति यलादव दलारला समजपर्गप्ति आवनदनि में उल्लनख जकयन हप जक जसपलाहदी-537 रामबचचन चपौधरदी जदनिनांक13.08.2019 सन फरलार हप । प्तिथला इनिकला बरलाबर कला यन रवपयला हप। जिको इनिकन कप्तिर्गव्यहदीनिप्तिला / स्वनच्छला चजरत्र, एक अच्छन पबुजलस कमर्मी निहहीं हकोनिन कला आरकोप हप। गलार्ग सन फरलार रहनिन कन आरकोप में जदनिनांक- 13.08.2019 कन प्रभलाव सन सलामलान्य जिदीवनि यलापनि भतला पर जनिलंजबप्ति करप्तिन हबुए उनिकन जवरूद्ध जवभलागदीय कलायर्गवलाहदी प्रलारलंभ जकयला गयला हप प्तिथला जनिलंबनि अवजध में इनिकला मबुख्यलालय पबुजलस कनन्द्र सबुपपौल हनोंगन। सबुपपौल जजिललादनशि स०-1009/2019 (जव०जिलाचस०- 83/19 प्रलारम्भ ) हप। भजवष्य में अपचलारदी अपनिला सनवला में दकोबलारला आप्तिन हप प्तिको इस जवभलागदीय कलायर्गवलाहदी कको पबुनि सलंचलाजलप्ति कर जनिणर्गय जलयला जिलाएगला।"
6. Having considered these facts, the punishment of dismissal has been reiterated by the Superintendent of Police,
5/5 Supaul in terms of decision of this Court on petitioner's earlier writ petition. The Court, therefore, does not find any infirmity in order passed by the Superintendent of Police dated 20-06-2021, as contained in Annexure-12 to the writ petition.
7. The writ petition is dismissed.
(Madhuresh Prasad, J) shyambihari/- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE N/A Uploading Date 24-12-2022 Transmission Date