A. M. AHMADI, SUJATA V. MANOHAR
Additional D. I. G. Of Police, Hyderabad – Appellant
Versus
P. R. K. Mohan – Respondent
ORDER
1. Special leave granted.
2. Despite service of notice, the respondent has not chosen to enter an appearance. We have heard the learned counsel for the appellant. The only ground on which the decision of the learned Single Judge came to be altered by the Division Bench is based on the interpretation of Section 12 of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958, which reads as under :
"12. Notwithstanding anything contained in any other law, a person found guilty of an offence and dealt with under the provisions of Section 3 or Section 4 shall not suffer disqualification, if any, attaching to a conviction of an offence under such law :"
The Division Bench of the High Court held that this provision has overriding effect over the provisions of any other law and, therefore, the order of dismissal was liable to be quashed on that ground alone.
3. The impugned order was passed on the basis of Section 12 of the Central Reserve Police Force Act, 1949 which inter alia provided that every person sentenced under this Act to imprisonment may be dismissed from the Force, and shall further be liable to forfeiture of pay, allowance and any other moneys due to him, as well as of any medals and decor
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.