MUKESH KUMAR Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) REJOINDER affidavit filed today in Court though out of time is taken on record.

(2.) BY this writ petition, the petitioner has asked for quashing of order dated 11th July, 2006 passed by the respondent No. 3 who had discharged the petitioner in course of training period. The petitioner was found fit and suitable to be recruited to the post of Male Constable in P.A.C. At the time of joining training course, he made declaration that there has been no criminal case either registered or pending against him. This declaration was made by an affidavit. In course of training period, it was detected by the respondents that the petitioner is alleged to have involved in connection with a Criminal Case being number 198 of 2001 u/S. 147/323/427/435/504/506 I.P.C. On the ground of false declaration, the petitioner was removed from service.

(3.) ACCORDING to the petitioner, the petitioner was not aware of any initiation of criminal proceedings against him as he was neither arrested nor interrogated by the police in any manner whatsoever. It transpires later on that an application U/S. 156(3) was made impleading the petitioner in the year 2001 and order was obtained behind the back of the petitioner. In the counter affidavit nothing has been disclosed showing that the petitioner was arrested. Nothing has been produced showing that the petitioner was arrested or interrogated in relation to pending criminal proceedings. On the other hand the petitioner stated on oath that he was not aware of criminal proceedings. He was neither arrested nor summoned by the police for interrogation. Under the circumstances, I am of the view that the petitioner has not made any incorrect declaration. It is not very uncommon that any complaint or any complaint petition can be made behind the back of any person. It is the police who has to inquire and investigate into the matter and that was always done behind the back of any person. When a person is summoned for investigation or arrested in connection with any case, he comes to know about initiation of criminal proceedings. The process of investigation cannot be said to be a pendency of criminal matter unless it is a complaint case U/S. 200 of Cr.P.C.