MAHESH SHARMA Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner was Head Constable/GD in CISF and on June 18, 2011 he was posted at CCIL/ICD Tughlakabad. On that day he was deployed on duty from 06:00 hrs to 18:00 hrs with arms at Railway Gate of ICD Tughlakabad alongwith Ct.GD Raghuram for protecting and safeguarding the property. On that day at about 15:45 hrs. the petitioner was allegedly caught by Sh.Dinesh Bhardwaj, owner of Sculpture Cargo and Sh.Dharmender Singh, Supervisor of B.Ghosh Company while he was carrying a box containing fastners made of brass weighing about 10 kg. When the matter came to the notice of ASI/Exe. S.Kadian, Incharge of CIW, a preliminary inquiry was conducted into the matter. On the basis of statement made by Sh.Dinesh Bhardwaj and Sh.Dharmender Singh and other material, charge memo dated July 06, 2011 was served on the petitioner with the following Articles of Charge:-

(2.) On finding the response of the petitioner to the charge memo being not satisfactory, the Disciplinary Authority decided to conduct an inquiry into the matter and Sh.Narender Kumar, Inspector/Fire of CISF Unit, BTPS Badarpur was appointed as Inquiry Officer. At the inquiry following seven witnesses were examined:-

(3.) Ms.Rekha Palli, Advocate has vehemently advocated the case of the petitioner challenging the finding of guilt recorded by the Inquiry Officer mainly on the ground that how such a finding could have been recorded when Sh.Dinesh Bhardwaj PW-1 and Sh.Dharmender Ghosh PW-2 had not made any incriminating statement against the petitioner rather claimed that under utter confusion prevailing at that time they made the statement during the preliminary inquiry. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that Inquiry Officer has ignored the material evidence of Sh.Dinesh Bhardwaj PW-1 and Sh.Dharmender Singh PW-2 and thus the inquiry report is liable to set aside as the findings are perverse.