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

2025 Supreme(Online)(Pat) 2008

PATNA HIGH COURT
Bhola Kumar Singh – Appellant
Versus
The State of Bihar – Respondent
CWJC-7478/2023



IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.7478 of 2023 ======================================================

Bhola Kumar Singh Son of Late Sahdev Singh Resident of Village-

Dhanamadih, P.S.-Sarmera, District-Patna.

... ... Petitioner Versus

1. The State of Bihar through the Director General of Police, Bihar, Patna.

2. The Director General of Police, Bihar, Patna.

3. The Inspector Genral of Police, Tirhut Range, Muzaffarpur.

4. The Additional Director Genral of Police (Budget and Appeal), Bihar, Patna.

5. The Inspector General of Police (Budget and Appeal), Bihar, Patna.

6. The Superintendent of Police, Sitamarhi.

7. The Enquiry officer-Cum-Superintendent of Police, City, Muzaffarpur.

... ... Respondents ======================================================

Appearance :

For the Petitioner : Mr. Vinay Ranjan, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. P.K. Verma, AAG-3 Mr. Suman Kumar Jha, A.C. to AAG-3 ======================================================

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR C.A.V. JUDGMENT Date : 10-12-2025 This writ petition has been filed for quashing the order as contained in memo no.731 dated 16.06.2021 issued under the signature of the Inspector General of Police, Tirhut Range, Muzaffarpur, by which punishment of stoppage of increment of salary for two years with non-cumulative effect has been inflicted upon the petitioner. The petitioner has further challenged the order as contained in memo no.558 dated 08.09.2022 passed by the Director General of Police, Bihar, Patna, in exercise of power under Rule 853A(a) of the Bihar Police Manual, 1978, by which the aforesaid punishment order 16.06.2021 was set aside and petitioner was reverted to the basic pay scale of Police Sub Inspector for five years and the petitioner was debarred from being posted as S.H.O. for 10 years and it was further directed that during suspension period the petitioner shall only be paid the subsistence allowance. Lastly, the prayer has been made to direct the respondent authorities to reinstate the petitioner on his earlier position with all consequential benefits.

2. The present case emanates from a seizure of approximately 4767.22 liters of illicit liquor from the vicinity of Sursand Police Station within the District of Sitamarhi, which was carried out by the A.L.T.F. (Excise Department), based on which, Sursand P.S. Case No.390 of 2020 dated 13.12.2020 was registered under sections 414, 467, 468, 471 read with section 120-B of the Indian Penal Code and under section section 30(a), 36 and 41 of the Bihar Excise Act.

3. The thrust of allegation against the petitioner is that he failed to gather intelligence and carry out the provisions of the Bihar Excise Act. Based on the recovery of illicit liquor from the vicinity of Sursand police station, the F.I.R. was registered and the petitioner was placed under suspension vide District Order No.1547 of 2020 dated 29.12.2020 and a departmental proceeding was initiated against the petitioner. Subsequently, memo of charge along with list of documents and witnesses were served upon the petitioner on 05.01.2021. The petitioner submitted his response / defence on 01.03.2021. The respondent authorities sought for the last defence of the petitioner which was submitted by him on 06.04.2021. The Enquiry Officer submitted his report to the disciplinary authority - I.G. Tirhut Range, who issued a second show-cause to the petitioner based on the aforesaid enquiry report. The petitioner submitted his explanation thereto on 07.05.2021. The disciplinary authority vide impugned order dated 16.06.2021 agreeing with the enquiry report has passed the order of punishment whereby the punishment of stoppage of increment of salary for two years with non-cumulative effect has been imposed upon the petitioner.

4. It would be relevant to quote the impugned order dated 16.06.2021 by which the punishment has been imposed upon the petitioner, which reads as under:-

lhrke<+h ftyk foHkkxh; tk¡p ¼dk;Zokgh½

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 Back to top