Judgment

SUBBA RAO, J. : This is an appeal by special leave against the judgment of the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench, allowing the petition filed by the respondent under Art. 226 of the constitution.

2. The respondent was appointed a Sub-Inspector of Police in December, 1948, and was posted at Sitapur in June, 1953. On September 6, 1953, the respondent went to village Madhwapur in connection with an investigation of a case of theft. On the evening of the said date when he was returning, accompanied by one Lalji, an expatwari of Mohiuddinpur, he saw one Tika Ram coming from the side of a canal and going hurriedly towards a field. As the movements of Tika Ram appeared to be suspicious and as he was carrying some thing in the folds of his dhoti, the respondent searched him and found a bundle containing currency notes. The respondent counted the currency notes and handed them over to Lalji for being returned to Tika Ram, who subsequently got them and went his way. Subsequently when Tilka Ram counted the currency notes at his house, he found that they were short by Rs. 250/-. Tika Ram s case is that the bundle when taken by the respondent contained notes of the value of Rs. 650/-, but when he counted them in his house they were only of the value of Rs. 400/-. On September 9, 1953, Tilka Ram filed a complaint to the Superintendent of Police, Sitapur, to the effect that the respondent and one Lalji had misappropriated a sum of Rs.250/-. There is dispute in regard to the interpretation of the complaint. On receipt of the said complaint, the Superintendent of Police made enquiries and issued a notice to the respondent to show cause why his integrity certificate should not be withheld, upon which the respondent submitted his explanation on October 3, 1953. Thereafter the Superintendent of Police forwarded the file of the case to the Deputy Inspector General of Police, Central Range, U. P., who directed the Superintendent of Police to take proceedings under S. 7 of the Police Act against the respondent. The departmental proceedings were started against the respondent; on November 2, 1953, a charge-sheet was served upon the respondent under S. 7 of the Police Act stating that there were strong reasons to suspect that the respondent misappropriated a sum of Rs. 250/- from the purse of Tika Ram; the respondent filed his explanation to the charge made against him: and ultimately the Superintendent of Police held an enquiry and found on the evidence that the respondent was guilty of the offence with which he was charged. On January 2, 1954, the Superintendent of Police issued another notice to the respondent to show cause why he should not be reduced to the lowest grade of Sub-Inspector for a period of three years. In due course the respondent showed cause against the action proposed to be taken against him on a consideration of which the Superintendent of Police, Sitapur, by his order dated January 16, 1954, reduced the respondent to the lowest grade of Sub-Inspector for a period of three years. When this order came to the notice of the D. I. G., U. P., on a consideration of the entire record, he came to the conclusion that the respondent should be dismissed from service and on October 19, 1954. He made an order to that effect. On February 28, 1955, the Inspector General of Police confirmed that order; and the revision filed by the respondent against that order to the State Government was also dismissed in August, 1955. Thereafter the respondent filed a petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution before the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench, for quashing the said orders and the same was heard by a division bench consisting of Randhir Singh and Bhargava, JJ. The learned judges held that the provisions of para. 486 of the Police Regulations had not been observed and, therefore, the proceedings taken under S. 7 of the Police Act were invalid and illegal. On that finding, they quashed the impugned orders;