Examining the grounds raised by Kumar, the HC was of the view that it could not be said that there was “no evidence” in the case. (File)In a case where a Delhi Police head constable was allegedly extorting money from passengers at the IGI Airport, the Delhi High Court rejected his appeal against dismissal from service and held that when police personnel breaks the law they must be “dealt with iron hands”.
A division bench of Chief Justice Satish Chandra Sharma and Justice Subramonium Prasad in its November 9 judgment observed that a police officer is supposed to be the “custodian of law” and whose duty is to ensure that people are following the law of the land. “If such a person himself breaks the law, he has to be dealt with iron hands, and, therefore, in the considered opinion of this Court no other punishment except dismissal could have been inflicted upon him in the facts and circumstances of the case,” held the bench.
The head constable was posted at Terminal 2 of the Indira Gandhi International Airport when on March 24, 1996, the then deputy commissioner of police (DCP) of the IGI Airport conducted a surprise visit and was informed that ASI Jagmal Singh and Head Constable Suresh Kumar who were checking passports of passengers were collecting money from travellers. The DCP carried out a search after which 75 Dirhams were recovered from Kumar’s pocket.
An action was initiated against Kumar under the Delhi Police (Punishment and Appeal) Rules, 1990, and the Delhi Police Act, 1978. He was dismissed from service by the Disciplinary Authority in an order of September 20, 1999. The then commissioner of police upheld the dismissal in a detailed and exhaustive speaking order. Kumar thereafter moved the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) which also upheld the dismissal.
Kumar argued before the Delhi High Court that no evidence had been adduced in his case, “It was a case of no evidence, and the findings arrived at by the Enquiry Officer are perverse findings. Therefore, the order passed the Authority, the Appellate Authority as well as the Ld. CAT deserves to be set aside,” he said.
Kumar further sought to be reinstated back in service. He said that the material witness in his case was the person from whom the money was allegedly extorted and he was not examined during the inquiry and therefore the entire procedure adopted in the matter is bad in law.
Examining the grounds raised by Kumar, the HC was of the view that it could not be said that there was “no evidence” in the case. “It is an undisputed fact that 75 Dirhams were recovered from the petitioner (Kumar) at the time when the search took place and the petitioner (Kumar) was certainly not a traveller who came from some foreign country, thereby being in possession of Dirhams,” observed the court.
The high court ruled that Kumar could not provide a satisfactory explanation for being in possession of foreign currency during the search and seizure.
Considering the evidence placed before it, the HC dismissed Kumar’s appeal and opined, “It is an open and shut case, wherein, a Head Constable was found with 75 Dirhams. He was posted on a very sensitive duty, to check the passports of passengers”.
The HC went through witness statements and said that it clearly established the misconduct committed by Kumar. The court also was of the view that courts can only interfere in a departmental inquiry only if there is a violation of natural justice principles, which was not the case before it.