30 years on, justice for discharged Punjab Police official at last

Chandigarh, February 9

It is justice at last for a Punjab Police official, discharged from the service over 30 years ago. Deprecating the police officials concerned for their conduct, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has allowed his appeal, filed in 1997, paving way for his reinstatement.

Law doesn’t give unbridled powers

There is no doubt that the law vests immense powers in the Superintendent of Police to act against a subordinate officer, but that does not bestow upon him unbridled powers. High Court Bench

The judgment by Justice Fateh Deep Singh came on ex-constable Massa Singh’s appeal filed through counsel Kapil Kakkar. The Bench was told that the appellant was recruited as a constable in the Punjab Police in December 1988. He proceeded on sanctioned leave from October 5, 1990, to October 8, 1990, but applied for extension till January 3, 1991, as he fell ill during his leave.

His counsel Kapil Kakkar and Shreesh Kakkar argued that he was not allowed to join and intimated about his discharge from the service vide order dated November 12, 1990. After adopting due process of law, he preferred a suit for declaration, challenging the order dated April 29, 1991, passed by the Jalandhar Cantt DIG, whereby his representation dated November 28, 1990, was declined. Directions were sought for setting aside of the same after terming it to be illegal, mala fide against the rules. The trial court, vide judgment dated October 10, 1992, decreed his suit, but the Jalandhar Additional District Judge, allowed the state appeal and set aside the trial court’s judgment/decree.

Justice Fateh Deep Singh asserted the appellant was posted at various places from 1988 to 1990. The lone incriminating document brought on the record was a departmental inquiry file, pertaining to vague allegations of having consumed liquor in 1988. It was not supported by medical evidence and “did not hold good”. It was a stale allegation and not valid after a long time. None of the ACRs were suggestive of any undesirable conduct.

Referring to a column in the lone document on which discharge order was passed, Justice Fateh Deep Singh asserted it showed an entry was sought to be made much after the writing of the form. It overlapped with the comments underneath and created a strong suspicion of deceptive intent in the court’s mind. It was an afterthought and a subsequent incorporation to strengthen the department’s case, for “which the concerned police officials’ conduct needs to be deprecated”.

“The entries not only appear to be false and fabricated by cooking up the records to advance the case of the department, but are also mala fide to achieve a motivated cause…There is no doubt that the law vests immense power to the Superintendent of Police to act against a subordinate police officer, but that does not bestow upon him unbridled powers which are against the canons of justice,” the Bench concluded.