The High Court dismissed a writ petition challenging the dismissal of a CISF Head Constable for molesting a colleague's daughter. Holding that the misconduct was grave and no exceptional circumstances existed, the Court refused to interfere with the disciplinary punishment.
The petition was dismissed with costs.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.3559 OF 2008
Jitan Yadav s/o Late Lallu Yadav .. Petitioner.
vs.
Union of India, through
Secretary
& Ors. .. Respondents.
Mr. A.D. Shetty i/by R.S. Upadhyay for Petitioner.
Mr. A.R. Choudhary & N.R. Prajapati for
Respondents.
CORAM: J.N. PATEL, &
S.J. KATHAWALLA, JJ.
DATE: 13TH OCTOBER, 2008.
P.C.
. Heard.
2. The petitioner has challenged the decision of
the respondent terminating the services of the
petitioner after conducting a disciplinary enquiry
wherein the petitioner was found guilty of having
molested the daughter of a colleague.
2
3. The petitioner who was employed as Head
constable in CISF and at the relevant time posted with
Unit I.S.P., Nasik was charge-sheeted for having
entered the residential quarter No. 130, Block No.
17, Type 2, Nehru Nagar of Shri Ramdevan Sinh,
Inspector, I.S.P. Nasik and attempted to outrage the
modesty of Miss Meena, daughter of Ramdevan Sinh,
Inspector. Secondly, that the petitioner without
giving previous intimation to the competent authority
and without obtaining his prior permission, went away
from the barrack unit and went to the residential
quarter of the said Shri Ramdevan Sinh with the
intention to outrage the modesty of his daughter when
Shri Ramdevan Sinh and his son were not present and his
wife had gone out.
4. During the enquiry it has come on record that
in his attempt to outrage the modesty of Meena he has
torn her clothing and after she resisted and shouted
and raised an alarm, could escape from his clutches and
ran out of her house, the petitioner left the place.
In the enquiry, evidence of the victim was recorded and
her mother came to be examined and the enquiry officer
found that their evidence along with the circumstances
sufficiently proves the charges against the petitioner
and on the basis of the finding in the enquiry, the
petitioner came to be dismissed. The petitioner
preferred an appeal in the matter which was also
3
rejected.
5. The learned counsel appearing for the
petitioner submitted that the petitioner has been
falsely implicated in the case as he refused to give
contribution for celebrating Ganpati Festival.
6. The disciplinary authority has carefully
examined the case and found that the enquiry officer
has not believed the defence taken up by the
petitioner.
7. The learned counsel for the petitioner further
submits that if one goes through the evidence of the
victim and her mother, there are lot of contradictions
and, therefore, it was not safe to rely upon their
evidence to arrive at such a finding and conclusion.
8. Though we are not sitting in appeal in the
matter, but in order to satisfy ourselves, we have gone
through the evidence recorded during the enquiry and
find no substance in the contention of the learned
counsel for the petitioner.
9. It is settled law that this Court in its writ
jurisdiction should not interfere with the punishment
imposed by the disciplinary authority unless
exceptional circumstances are made out. This is a case
where a security personnel of CISF has committed
4
grave misconduct which disentitles him to be continued
in the force and, therefore, we do not find any
justification for interfering with the findings of the
enquiry officer or the punishment imposed by the
disciplinary authority which has been upheld by the
appellate authority. The petition is dismissed with
costs.
(J.N. Patel, J.)
(S.J. Kathawalla, J.)
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court can interfere with the dismissal of a CISF constable found guilty of molesting a colleague's daughter.
Whether the petitioner's refusal to contribute to the Ganpati Festival justifies wrongful termination.
Whether the contradictions in victim evidence merit interference with the disciplinary authority's findings.
Jitan Yadav
Union of India
J.N. Patel
S.J. Kathawalla
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court