Amar Singh v. State Of Punjab And Others
"#$# %& '( (
) *
+(
,$(
* *
(((* *
)& -. )( * )
*.
////
)
*.0 1.2
!""#$""%& '& ( setting aside of: )* Order dated 22.10.2022 passed by respondent No. 4 whereby he was dismissed from service; (ii) Order dated 17.03.2023 (Annexure P-3) and order dated 29.12.2023 (Annexure P-5) passed by Additional Director General of Police, State Armed Police, Jalandhar-respondent No. 3 whereby his appeals against the order dated 22.10.2022 (Annexure P-1) were dismissed.
"
The petitioner joined Punjab Police on 22.09.1990. In 1994, he was promoted to the rank of Head Constable. In 2012, he was adorned with rank of Assistant Sub-Inspector (Local Rank). An FIR No. 129 dated 15.10.2022 under Sections 365, 392, 120-B IPC and Section 25 Arms Act, 1959 at Police Station Division No. 8, Ludhiana was registered against him along with four other persons. He was arrested in the said FIR. The Disciplinary Authority invoking
Clause (b) of second proviso to Article 311(2) of the Constitution of India dismissed him from service without conducting inquiry. He unsuccessfully preferred an appeal before Appellate Authority. He faced trial and came to be acquitted vide judgment dated 07.07.2022 (Annexure P-2) by Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Ludhiana. After his acquittal, he approached Authorities to reinstate him. By impugned order dated 29.12.2023 (Annexure P-5) which was served upon him on 18.12.2024, the Competent Authority has rejected his claim. Hence this petition. +
& , !- - .! + &
! .! /+0 )& 1 /+0 .!2*
!- !
3
, - !' !
!
4&
'
!&&5 6 & ( & & ! %
7 . 4 "/
"9 "5+#8+/" "9: ' 5"8
/8/
, ! ! ! ;
& & !'<
!- &
!- , & & ! 3
&
& ! && & ! & /
&
!
&! !
, !& ! !!-! - & ! ! && -
! , ! ! < .! +& /+0.! & , !
< .! +& /+0.! !&&! -& ! 7 -&.! +& /+0 .! !
"
# $ %
!
! # $ &
!
#
!
! &
#
'()
)"* *
+!
%
%
,
-
%
!
*
.
/
!
01 $ % 2 & 3
.
.4 7 !&
.!,
& ! =&& ! .! , - ! '
!! !!- &&
! < .! <!< ! 5& !&
"
!
& ! > !
-5'!! &&
! - & ! -! , ! ! ! ! ! & !
! && ! -
! .! .! + & /+0 .! & !!-
+
! !!
! 0 & !- ! !& !
!&! 5 %+' '
! !& ! !'< ! - & !' !
& ! ! !
& !
!! !
!!- &
! < & & ! ' !
() 5!
!
!
6 !
7
8
5! 9 2 & * &
&
!
!
7
!
$
!
&
! !
(' 5!
!
/
5 :
, !
!
&
!
;
<
!
&
!
, !
=
!
6
>
, !!
!
;
;
, !
, ! &
.
, !
!
!
!
; '% 6
2 & * & !
!
2 % > ;
!
,
!
;
;
! !
!
2 & * & ?
2 & * & ; , !
?
(0 .
&
,
!
.
,
!
.
,
!
=
=
6
!
!
2 % > 5 &
!
?
?
5 '
! "
!
' !( &
, ! ! ! ! < &
" 87 ,
4
4 &
@ !!
.
@
>
87 1
,
(9AB0(
!
=
!
&
= & !
&
?
, - !' 7 ! & & - ! '
& !-& !! !& & ! !! - !
& !
- < !! & !! !' , &&! !
, !
! ! & !! !
&& !! -< .! + & /+0 .! !
Proviso to sub-rule (2) of Rule 16.2 of Punjab Police Rules, mandates that in case conviction of a police officer is set aside in appeal or revision, the officer empowered to appoint him shall review his case keeping in view the instructions issued by government in this behalf. Rule 16.3 of Punjab Police Rules, 1934 provides that if a police officer is acquitted by criminal
Court, he shall not be punished departmentally on the same charge or on a different charge upon the evidence cited in the criminal case. Rules 16.2 of 1934 Rule is reproduced as below:- '( # *
.
,
4 ( .
C
7
7
!
7
C
!
! ,
! /
1
&
/ :
.
!
!
/ :
4 0 sub-rule (2) of Rule 16.2 of 1934 Rules, if the conduct of an officer leads to his conviction on a criminal charge and he is sentenced to imprisonment, he shall be dismissed. As per first proviso, the punishing authority in an exceptional case may impose any punishment other than that of dismissal from service. As per second proviso to sub-rule (2) of Rule 16.2 of
1934 Rules, if conviction is set-aside in appeal or revision, the officer shall review his case. As per Rule 16.3, an officer cannot be departmentally punished, if he is acquitted by trial Court. From the conjoint reading of Rule 16.3 and Rule 16.2 (2), it is evident that departmental punishment particularly dismissal from service, in case of criminal proceedings depends upon the outcome of trial. If the officer is acquitted in criminal proceedings, departmental authorities should reconsider punishment of dismissal from service. As per sub-rule (2) of Rule 16.2, consequence of conviction and sentence is dismissal from service.
'
! && 7 . &Rule 16.2 and 16.3 is to dismiss from service after conviction. The officer may be suspended or assigned non sensitive posting, however, department should not take harsh action of dismissal from service- 7 .
< ! & ! & - ( !
& 7 . 4 !,- 3
, ! !
!!- !
3&"9 "
3& - &
&
3 -"9 "
! -!&""- 3 ! - && .! " - ! & !& ! & !) *&.! " & !&
! & & &&sub-rule (2) of Rule 16.2. This Court, in view of mandate of Rules 16.2 and 16.3 as well as factum that petitioner is out of service since 2012 and has been acquitted by trial Court, finds it appropriate to set-aside impugned orders dated 22.10.2022, 17.03.2023 and 29.12.2023. The petitioner deserves to be reinstated.
;
& & <
,- 7 !& - !&
& ,- !
- .! "0 & /+0 .! !+
& '& '!
) *& !+
)"*& '& ,- - )* ( &
! !
@ )* -&
!-
!
! ,-@)* &
& -& 5 < ! ,- 7 - &! +
)"* & ' &
! A1(5
, 7
!
!
,
C
!
, !
# !
!
,
!
# !
/
%
4
/
' ! : $ % & '
( ) *"+,
*"
!( &'!
) *& !+
)"*&! - -& ! - -
! !,- ! < & 11 =
!
!
@ 1( =
!
!
!
!
4 "9
! !,- ! - - ""
"9 ")< *
.
@%.D+2 @
%
5E(D9B
,
F
*
:
!
!
!
4 "
- ' ;" :
! '
4 0& ,-!
!
- 7 .
!&& ,-& !!-
! ! ,- !
! !,-! & & '& .! "0& /+0.! & - ! &,- ((
(&
&
- (1
!! !
(
!! ! !! ! &! -& "0
> &! & - "+
"9"8
3)
*.4
( $ B$4
! B$4