The dismissal from service was deemed disproportionate given the appellant's acquittal in the criminal case and lengthy service, necessitating modification to compulsory retirement with pension benefits.

JUDGMENT :

B.V. NAGARATHNA, J.

Being aggrieved by the order dated 29.07.2015 passed by the Division Bench of the High Court of Delhi in Civil Writ Petition No.6411 of 2012 by which the writ petition filed by the original appellant assailing his dismissal from service was itself dismissed and no relief was granted to him, the present appeal has been filed before this Court.

2. Briefly stated, the facts of the instant case are that the appellant was recruited as a Constable in the Railway Protection Force (hereinafter, “RPF”) on 01.08.1994. In the year 2006, the appellant was posted at the Shahdara Post, Delhi.

3. On 13.03.2007, a First Information Report being FIR No. 45/2007 was registered with Police Station Babri, District Muzaffarnagar, Uttar Pradesh, under Sections 363 and 366 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE , 1860 (hereinafter, “IPC”). The aforesaid FIR was registered against five persons, including the appellant, his father, and his brothers, alleging the abduction of a girl. It was alleged that the appellant’s brother, Rajeev, committed the main offence, while the appellant was accused of abetting and assisting him.

4. Upon conclusion of the investigation, the Police filed a charge-sheet dated 06.07.2007 only against the main accused, Rajeev. However, in the year 2010, acting on an application filed by the complainant under Section 319 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter, “CrPC”), the Sessions Court summoned the appellant. Charges were framed against the appellant on 08.08.2010. Subsequently, due to non-appearance, non-bailable warrants were issued, and the appellant was taken into judicial custody on 29.11.2010. He was eventually released on bail on 01.01.2011.

5. Immediately thereafter, the Respondent-Authorities served Charge-Sheet dated 12.01.2011 upon the appellant under Rule 153 of the Railway Protection Force Rules, 1987 alleging: firstly, that the appellant concealed facts pertaining to his involvement in the criminal case, and secondly, he had failed to intimate the department regarding his arrest and detention.

6. An Inquiry Report dated 10.05.2011 was submitted, which, inter alia, categorically noted that on the date of the alleged criminal incident, the appellant was on duty at his post in Delhi. Notwithstanding this finding, the Senior Circle Security Commissioner, RPF, Northern Railway, passed an order dated 24.06.2011 dismissing the appellant from service.

7. Aggrieved by the order of dismissal, the appellant preferred a Revision Petition, which was dismissed by the Inspector General, Chief Protection Commissioner on 18.01.2012. Aggrieved, the appellant subsequently preferred an appeal before the Director General, RPF, which also did not yield any relief. Consequently, the appellant approached the High Court of Delhi by filing W.P.(C) No. 6411/2012 on 08.08.2012 seeking reinstatement.

8. During the pendency of the Writ Petition, the trial in the criminal case concluded. By judgment and order dated 16.11.2013 in Session Trial No. 1457/07, the Additional Sessions Judge, Muzaffarnagar, U.P., acquitted the appellant of all charges under Sections 363 , 366, and 376 of the IPC. The Trial Court specifically observed that on the date of the incident, the appellant was performing his official duties in Delhi and was not present at the place of occurrence.

9. Despite the acquittal and the specific finding regarding the appellant’s plea of alibi, the High Court, vide the impugned judgment dated 29.07.2015, dismissed the Writ Petition. The High Court observed that the acquittal was based on technical considerations and held that the Respondent-Authorities’ decis