WP(C) 22584 of 2005

Page 1 of 36

*

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+

W.P.(C) No.22584/2005

%

Date of Decision: 9.09.2011

Commissioner of Police, Delhi

…. Petitioner

Through Mr.Bhupesh Narula, Advocate

Versus

H.C.Laxmi Chand

…. Respondent

Through Mr.Anil Singhal, Advocate

CORAM:

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDERSHAN KUMAR MISRA

1.

Whether reporters of Local papers may

be allowed to see the judgment?

YES

2.

To be referred to the reporter or not?

YES

3.

Whether the judgment should be

reported in the Digest?

YES

ANIL KUMAR, J.

*

1. The petitioner, Commissioner of Police, has challenged the order

dated 25^th May, 2005 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal,

Principal Bench, New Delhi, titled as „H.C. Laxmi Chand v. Government

of NCT of Delhi‟, allowing the original application of the respondent and

setting aside the order of punishment dated 28^th July, 2003 passed by

2011:DHC:4607-DB

WP(C) 22584 of 2005

Page 2 of 36

the Disciplinary Authority awarding the forfeiture of 4 years of approved

service permanently and also setting aside the Appellate order dated

11^th October, 2004 dismissing the appeal of the respondent.

2. Brief facts to comprehend the controversies are that one Lal

Bahadur S/o Gorakh Bahadur, a domestic servant of Sh.Shanker Lal

Sangwani S/o Sh.Prahlad Rai Sangwani, a resident of Plot No.34,

Kanwar Nagar, Jaipur, Rajasthan had committed theft in the house of

his owner and had left for Delhi along with some jewelry and other

articles.

3. The respondent along with Constable Sheel Bahadur was posted

on Picket Duty at Farash Khan, S.N.Marg, Delhi on 28^th May, 1995.

They checked the belongings of Lal Bahadur who was allegedly in

possession of the stolen goods. The allegation was made that the stolen

goods were taken by the respondent and Const. Sheel Bahadur from Lal

Bahadur. A departmental enquiry was ordered against the respondent

and Constable Sheel Bahadur by order dated 21st June, 1995 on the

allegation that the respondent as well as Constable Sheel Bahadur on

finding that Lal Bahadur was in possession of stolen goods, instead of

producing him before the senior officers, had kept all the valuable

articles and cash with themselves and let off Lal Bahadur without

taking any legal action.

2011:DHC:4607-DB

WP(C) 22584 of 2005

Page 3 of 36

4. The alleged act of the respondent and the other Constable came

to light when SI Narain Singh of Police Station Subhash Chowk, Jaipur

(Rajasthan) visited the Police Station Lahori Gate, Delhi and arrested

the respondent on the disclosure statement of and identification by Lal

Bahadur who was the main accused in FIR No.83/1995 under Section

381 and 411 of the Indian Penal Code, P.S.Subhash Chowk, Jaipur.

5. It was alleged that the goods which were stolen by Lal Bahadur

and which were subsequently taken from him by the respondent and

Constable Sheel Bahadur, were allegedly recovered from them as well.

The respondent and Constable Sheel Bahadur were accused of extortion

and criminal misappropriation of stolen property and having committed

a breach of trust and also having tarnished the image of the whole

police department in the eyes of the public by failing to maintain the

integrity and devotion to duty and in acting in a manner very

unbecoming of police officers, which was also in contravention of CCS

(Conduct) Rules, 1964.

6. The respondent was placed under suspension by DCP/North

District by Order No.4008-30/HAP-N dated 9^th June, 1995. The

departmental enquiry was directed to be conducted on a day to day

basis. Summary of allegations, list of witnesses and list of documents