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

1958 Supreme(All) 196

J.SAHAI
MUKHTAR SINGH – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
S.N.MISRA

J. SAHAI, J.


( 1 ) THE petitioner was originally recruited as a constable in the U. P. police force but was later on promoted to be a head-constable after having completed the necessary training. In February 1955 he was posted in Shahjahanpur and on the 17th of that month he received an order of suspension. The suspension order was communicated to him telcphonically by the Kotwal, Shahja-hanpur. On the 7th of April 1955 a charge sheet was served upon him. He submitted his reply to the charges on or about the 17th of April 1955. The petitioner was departmentally tried under section 7 of the Indian Police Act. Sri R. D. Pandey, Superintendent of Police, Shahjahanpur. , recorded findings-against the petitioner, the concluding portion of which runs as follows :-

"in view of the seriousness of the charge and the fact that it has been proved beyond any shadow of doubt and the bad record of service and the fact that all sorts of punishments have had no effect on the party charged to reform him I feel that he is a thoroughly undesirable type incapable of reform. He is the type that brings a bad name to the police force and is responsible tor spoiling police and public relations. He is a slu

















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