KARANSINH FATEHSINH GOHIL Vs. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, who at the relevant time was working as a Police Sub-Inspector, Sabarmati Police Station, Ahmedabad, has challenged in this petition an order dated 17.3.1989 passed by the Police Commissioner, Ahmedabad City whereby the petitioner was suspended as he was involved in a serious crime punishable under sections 161, 165.A and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and section 7 read with section 12 of Prevention of Corruption Act.

(2.) From the order Annexure 'A' it appears that with A.C.B Police Station C.R. No. 25 of 1988 was lodged by Valjibhai Odharbhai Rebari, aged about 67 years. A copy of the First Information Report is produced at Annexure 'C'. As a complaint for a serious offence was pending, the Commissioner of Police made an order of suspension which according to the learned advocate appearing for the petitioner, is passed in an arbitrary manner, and the same is also a malafide order.

(3.) Reading the complaint Annexure 'C' it appears that the petitioner was working at the Sabarmati Police Station while the complainant Valjibhai Odharbhai Rebari was residing at Bhagwati Society, Chandkheda, Dist. Gandhinagar with his family members. He was serving at the relevant time in Gujarat Steel Tubes Ltd., and was also elected as a member of the Chandkheda Nagar Panchyat. He was also General Secretary of Navgujarat Kamdar Parishad. Before eight days from 11.11.1988, as stated in the complaint, a police constable conveyed to the mother of the petitioner that the petitioner is summoned by Sub-Inspector at Kaligam Police Chowky. Thinking that there may be some work, the petitioner reached Kaligam Police Chowky where he approached Police Sub Inspector Gohil, the petitioner herein. PSI Gohil conveyed that against Valjibhai and four or five other office bearers of Gujarat Steel Tubes, there is a compliant and that is required to be investigated. It is alleged in the complaint that Sub Inspector gave abuses and stated to him that he is a head-strong person and is taking the law in his hands. The complainant Valjibhai requested him to calm down and convey the true facts and the names of the persons. He was told that in the complaint names of the persons are referred, and he should call them and after recording their statements a decision will be taken as to what should be done in the matter. The petitioner was told to approach the Writer. Accordingly, he approached one Dayabhai, Writer of the PSI who was not in the police uniform at the relevant time. He took Valjibhai outside the Chowky and stated that there are serious allegations and it is advisable that the matter should be settled, otherwise it would be too late. The complainant enquired as to what are the allegations. However, he was told by the said Constable that he need not bother about the allegations, but he may settle the matter and for that purpose, he will have to pay Rs.1,000.00. Thereupon, it was stated by the said Valjibhai that he is an ordinary labourer and he cannot bring this huge amount. Ultimately, the said Writer said that he will have to inquire from the PSI, and went to the police chowky. After some discussion with the said PSI Gohil, he came back. Ultimately, he agreed to accept Rs.650.00. The constable further stated that out of this amount, Rs.500.00 will go to the PSI and Rs.150.00 is his share. The said Valjibhai realised that if the amount is not paid, then not only he but also other office bearers will be harassed, and paid Rs.400.00 which he had with him at the relevant time, and conveyed that the remaining amount will be paid within two to four days time. It is further stated in the complaint that on 9.11.1988, Mohan Odhar and Natubhai Babulal Jaiswal who were also working in Gujarat Steel Tubes Ltd. were called by the police at Kaligam Police Chowky. The complainant also accompanied them. In the complaint, it is specifically stated that the Writer Dayabhai demanded the remaining amount of Rs.250.00. However, he had with him only Rs.50.00 and he paid the said amount. For paying the remaining amount, he was called to remain present on 11.11.1988 at about 6.00 pm. He was further informed that PSI Gohil will also remain present at the relevant date and time. The statement of Mohan Odhar and Jaiswal were recorded as stated in the complaint. On 11.11. 1988, a complaint was lodged with the ACB and a trap was laid.