LAWS(SC)-1960-11-49

TIRLOK NATH Vs. UNION OF INDIA

Decided On November 01, 1960
TIRLOK NATH Appellant
V/S
UNION OF INDIA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal by special leave against the judgment of the High court of Punjab dismissing in limn the appellant's petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution for quashing the order of the Chief Commissioner of Delhi removing him from service.

(2.) The appellant was appointed as Sub-Inspector of Police in the North West Frontier Province on 1/01/1925, and was officiating as an Inspector of Police before the partition of India. After the partition he was appointed as Sub-Inspector of Police at Delhi and was later promoted as Inspector of Police and subsequently as Deputy Superintendent of Police in the Crime Branch.

(3.) Certain criminal cases were investigated by the Delhi C. I. D. against a woman known as Dr. Vimla. The papers in connection with the investigation used to pass between the investigation officer and the Superintendent of Police through the appellant. It was alleged that on 4/03/1955, the appellant went to Dr. Vimla's office in Coandni Chowk and offered to help her in the cases against her. On March 11, he told her on telephone that she should meet him at the Delhi Railway Station at 5. 00 P. M. and asked her that she should come alone and that too not in her own car. Hi also told her that he would take her to some place and so she should leave word at her house that she would not return till 9. 00 P. M. Dr. Vimla immediately reported to the District Magistrate that the appellant was making overtures to her on the pretext that he would help her in the criminal cases pending against her Thereupon the District Magistrate asked her to telephone the appellant in his presence and in the presence of Shri M. L. Nanda, Senior Superintendent of Police. She did so and the telephone conversation between her and the appellant was tapped and recorded. Pursuant to the direction of the District Magistrate a trap was then laid for apprehending the appellant and Dr. Vimla at the place where the appellant had proposed to take Dr. Vimla.