An order of suspension of a police officer must be passed in accordance with Regulation 880 of the Police Regulations of Bengal, 1943, and must be based on a consideration of the relevant facts.

1. THIS Writ petition is directed against an order of suspension passed by the Superintendent of Police, Burdwan, against the petitioner by an order dated14th May, 1989. By the aforesaid order the petitioner, a Sub-Inspector of Police, has been placed under suspension with retrospective effect from the 15th April, 1989 when he was arrested by the police in connection with Chinsurah Police Station Case No. 80 dated 14th April, 1989 under sections 498 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code.

2. THE learned Counsel for the State has informed the court that on receiving a complaint that the petitioner used to frequently assault the wife of a teacher in Hooghly Don Bosco School, the aforesaid police station case was started against the petitioner and he was placed under arrest. The allegation is that the petitioner was a friend of the husband of the said school teacher. The Husband and the petitioner and his wife frequently assaulted the wife of the school teacher. After coming to know of such incident the father of the said wife of the school teacher lodged a complaint and the said police case was smarted.

3. THE learned Counsel for the petitioner has contended that the said criminal case is pending wherein the correctness of the allegation will be gone into and appropriate decision be made against the petitioner who is an accused by there was no reason for the superintendent of Police, Burdwan, to place the petitioner under suspension, the attention of the Court has been drawn to Regulation 880 of the police Regulations of Bengal, 1943. The provision of Regulation 880 is set out herein below:-

"Suspension is not to be considered a specific punishment, and is only authorised in cases where the continuance in an (office of an officer pending enquiry into his conduct is prejudicial to public interest. When the enquiry is completed, some definite order of acquittal or punishment shall be recorded."

4. THE learned Counsel has contended that for a police personnel who is governed by -the said police regulation, the order of suspension can only be passed if on consideration of the relevant facts the Disciplinary Authority comes to the finding that continuance in an office by a delinquent officer pending enquiry into his conduct will be prejudicial to public interest. The learned Counsels has contended that the petitioner is a Sub-Inspector of Police now attached to Computer Cell in Burdwan and for an alleged incident of assault to the wife of his friend at Chinsurah there cannot be any occasion for placing him under suspension on the ground that continuance of the petitioner in office will be prejudicial to public interests during the enquiry proceeding. The learned Counsel for the petitioner has contended that the Regulation 880 envisages an enquiry into the disciplinary proceeding and not an enquiry in a criminal case instituted against the accused. He therefore submits that in the facts of the' case the Regulation 880 is not also attracted and even if the Regulation 880 is applicable there cannot be any occasion for suspending the petitioner whose involvement in the alleged assault on his friend's wife at Chinsurah cannot be detrimental to his continuance in office in the Computer Cell at Burdwan; the learned Counsel has also contended that the Superintendent of police has not only passed the said order of suspension illegally and without jurisdiction but there has been total non-application of mind which will be apparent from the order of suspension. He has submitted that the order of suspension has been sought to be passed by giving it a retrospective effect from date of the arrest of the petitioner sometime in April. He has contended that such retrospective order of suspension is not permissible under any existing rule governing the service conditions of the petitioner who is a Sub-Inspector of Police. He has contended that under the West Bengal Services (Classification, control and Appeal) Rules, 1971 if a delinquent officer is ke