Petitioner challenged a departmental order imposing a minor punishment and treating suspension as leave for failing to submit a charge-sheet within time. The bench found no procedural illegality and dismissed the writ petition.
Writ petition dismissed as the impugned order does not warrant interference and no appeal was preferred.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.18990 of 2008
=========================================================== Dwarika Nath Jha, s/o Late Bisheshwar Jha, r/v and P.O. – Loha, P.s. – Kaluahi, District - Madhubani
.... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
.... .... Respondent/s
=========================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. BINDHYACHAL SINGH, Adv. Mr. Uday Pratap Singh Mr. Prashant Sinha For the Respondent/s : Mr. Manoj Kumar Ambastha –SC-26 Mr. Subodh Kumar A.C. to S.C. - 26
=========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL JUDGMENT
Date: 04-02-2017
Heard both sides.
The petitioner seeks quashing of the order, as contained in Memo No. 1793 dated 09.07.2008 at annexure-6.
Facts which are relevant for the disposal of this writ petition are that the petitioner was posted, as Assistant Sub-Inspector in Bhabhua Police Station and he was the Investigating Officer of Bhabhua P.S. Case No. 160/2007, but the petitioner being the Investigating Officer of Bhabhua P.S. Case No. 160/2007 did not submit charge-sheet within time, as mandated under Section 167(2) of the Cr. P.C. The petitioner was put under suspension vide order, as contained in Memo No. 370 dated 09.04.2008 and a departmental
Patna High Court CWJC No.18990 of 2008 dt.04-02-2017
2/2
proceeding was initiated. The petitioner filed his show-cause and admitted his own fault, but at the same time, prayed to accept his apology. The Disciplinary Authority inflicted minor punishment by giving a ‘Kalank’ (black-mark) and the period of suspension of the petitioner was treated to be on leave. I do not find any procedural illegality in the departmental proceeding.
Learned counsel for the State also pointed out that the petitioner has not preferred appeal/revision against the order inflicting punishment against him. If the petitioner, so advised, may prefer statutory appeal or revision before the authority concerned.
Having considered the facts, I find that the order impugned does not warrant any interference. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed.
(Prabhat Kumar Jha, J.)
Vinita/-
| AFR/NAFR | NAFR |
|---|---|
| CAVDATE | NA |
| Uploading | |
| Date | |
| Transmission Date |
NA |
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the departmental order imposing a minor punishment warrants interference by this Court.
Dwarika Nath Jha
The State of Bihar
The Deputy Inspector General of Police, Sahabad Region
The Superintendent of Police, Kaimur
The Sub-Divisional Police Officer, Mohania, Kaimur
Prabhat Kumar Jha
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
