Mere incarceration without conviction not ground for dismissal: Allahabad High Court upholds relief to CISF constable

The court noted that there was no basis for initiation of the disciplinary proceedings and issuance of chargesheet against the CISF constable merely because of his incarceration in a criminal case.

Case

The accused was working as head constable in the CISF. He was accused in a murder case and was incarcerated in prison for around four months before getting bail. He remained under suspension from service.

After being served with a chargesheet in disciplinary proceedings, he was ultimately removed from service. The charge alleged was of gross misconduct on account of his involvement in the aforesaid criminal case.

Consequent upon his removal, the entire emoluments which would have been paid to him were forfeited in view of his removal from service.

The constable challenged his removal before a single bench of the high court. The single bench set aside the termination order. The single bench’s order was challenged before the division bench by the central government.

Findings

The court noted that the only charge against the constable was that he was incarcerated for a certain period in connection with a criminal case, which was of a heinous nature.

It further observed that he was not convicted at the time of initiation of disciplinary proceedings and even today, the trial was pending and he hasn’t been convicted for the offence alleged.

“It is therefore, unthinkable as to how, at the stage of initiation of disciplinary proceedings or passing of the removal order, any authority whether it be the supervisory officer or the disciplinary authority could have formed any opinion based merely on the incarceration of the respondent/ petitioner in respect of a criminal case and his alleged involvement therein, even if the offence was of a heinous nature, that he was remiss or negligent in the discharge of his duties or unfit for the same,” the court said.

The court observed that the single bench cannot be faulted for having quashed the removal order.

“Learned Single Judge therefore, cannot be faulted for having quashed the removal order, as, the very initiation of disciplinary proceedings, in the facts and circumstances of this case, for imposing punishment of removal was without any factual and legal basis,” the court said.

The court therefore upheld the ruling quashing termination order. As regards the payment of dues the court directed the authority concerned to take a decision as per the Rules applicable.