IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MANINDER S. BHATTI

th

ON THE 28 OF JANUARY, 2026 WRIT PET. (SERVICE) No. 503 of 2004 SHYAM BHAHADUR SINGH Versus THE UNION OF INDIA & ORS.

Appearance:

Shri Jaydeep Kourav - Advocate for the petitioner.

Shri Suyash Mohan Guru - Advocate for the respondents.

ORDER This petition has been filed by the petitioner under Article 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India while praying for following reliefs:-

"(i) to issue a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the dismissal order dated 27.12.2002 (Annex.P/1) and appellate order dated

8.7.2003 (Annex.P/2).

(ii) To issue a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to reinstate the petitioner into services along with seniority and all other benefits including back-wages.

(iii) To issue a command for production of entire record pertaining to the present case to kind of the Hon'ble High Court.

(iv) to grant any other relief deemed fit."

2. The brief facts of the case leading to the present petition are that the petitioner was initially inducted as a Constable in C.I.S.F. vide an order dated 02.07.1994. Nearly after 8 years into service, while being posted at C.I.S.F. Unit BIOP-DEP-05, the petitioner was issued a charge-sheet imputing gross allegations of misconduct on account of bigamy. In pursuance thereof, a departmental enquiry was conducted against the petitioner in terms of Rule 36(2) of C.I.S.F. Rules, 2001 which culminated into the enquiry report with the charges solevelled against the petitioner, standing proved. Thereafter, the disciplinary authority vide an order dated 27.12.2002 contained in Annexure P/1 passed the final order directing the petitioner’s dismissal from service while concurring with the findings of the enquiry officer. Dejected by the aforesaid order, the petitioner preferred an appeal before Respondent No. 3, but to no avail. Thereby, being aggrieved the petitioner has approached this Court assailing the impugned orders of dismissal from service as well as the order of the appellate authority.

3. Learned Counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner has served as an honourable member of the force and his conduct has been exemplary and unblemished throughout his tenure. The petitioner was aghast when a charge sheet was issued against him, levelling serious allegations of misconduct on account of bigamy. It is contended by the counsel that the complaint by his divorced wife Usha Singh, which has resulted in the issuance of a charge-sheet, was a sham as the petitioner had already separated from her as per the prevalent social customs of the community. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has placed reliance on the decision of a Division Bench of this Court in Gop Chand Rai vs. State of M.P. reported in 2004 (2) M.PH.T. 21 and a decision of the High Court of Jharkhand in Birendra Kumar Ram vs. Union of India, through its Secretary &Ors., reported in 2025 SCC Online Jhar 367 to buttress his contention. Moreover, Usha Singh had sworn an affidavit that she is legally separated from the petitioner and has no objection to him contracting another marriage. The aforesaid affidavit was backed by affidavits from Usha Singh’s father and her brother, respectively. Notably, the Apex Court has, in a slew of decisions has observed that divorce as per the customs of a community is legally valid. Thus, it is submitted that the impugned orders suffer from non-

application of mind and cannot pass muster.

4. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent submitted that the impugned orders have rightly been passed and are commensurate with the gravity of misconduct on account of the offence of bigamy. The petitioner contracted another marriage during the lifetime of his first wife without obtaining a divorce from a competent Court of Law, a conduct which is strictly prohibited under the C.I.S.F Rules as well as in light of Rule 21 of the CCS (Conduct) Rules. It is further contended that the