SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2003 Supreme(SC) 146

SHIVARAJ V.PATIL, ARIJIT PASAYAT
State Of U. P. – Appellant
Versus
HARENDRA KUMAR – Respondent


ORDER

1. WHEN CERTAIN MISCONDUCT CAME TO THE NOTICE OF THE COMPETENT AUTHORITY, A PRELIMINARY ENQUIRY WAS ORDERED TO ASCERTAIN AS TO WHETHER THERE WAS ANY NEED TO INITIATE DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDING OR NOT. AFTER PRELIMINARY ENQUIRY AND IN THE LIGHT OF THE PRELIMINARY ENQUIRY REPORT, DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS WERE INITIATED AGAINST THE RESPONDENT ON THE CHARGE THAT WHILE HE WAS ON DUTY HE HAS CONSUMED LIQUOR AND ABUSED ANOTHER CONSTABLE WHEN HE WAS ON DUTY. THEREAFTER, A REGULAR ENQUIRY WAS HELD AND ON THE BASIS OF THE MATERIAL PLACED IN THE ENQUIRY, THE ENQUIRY OFFICER HAVING RECORDED A FINDING THAT THE CHARGE LEVELLED AGAINST THE RESPONDENT WAS PROVED, MADE THE FOLLOWING RECOMMENDATIONS:

"TASK FORCE BATTALION IS ARMED WITH SOPHISTICATED WEAPONS AND A MINOR DIVERSION OR NEGLIGENCE CAN PROVE FATAL. THEREFORE IT IS DANGEROUS IF AN EMPLOYEE IS ON DUTY WHILE IN INEBRIATED STATE.

BEING IN AN INTOXICATED STATE WHILE REPORTING ON DUTY AND SHOWING INDISCIPLINE IS NOT SOMETHING APPRECIATED OR DESIRED IN TASK FORCE OR PAC, A DISCIPLINARY FORCE. THEREFORE IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT THIS CONSTABLE HARENDRA KUMAR 56306 MAY BE DISMISSED FROM SERVICE UNDER THE PROVISION OF RULE 14(1) OF THE D.P. POLICE





















Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top