ANOPSINH HARISINH BHAGORA Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed by the petitioner challenging the order dtd. 27/10/2015 passed by the respondent-State by which the punishment was inflicted upon the petitioner by deduction of 100% monthly pension. The petitioner also challenges the communication dtd. 9/2/2016 by which the respondent-State refused to renew/reconsider the impugned order dtd. 27/10/2015.

(2.) It is a case where the petitioner who was serving as Police Sub-Inspector was proceeded departmentally on account of an incident involving escape of under-trial prisoner from the custody. The challenge to the impugned order is two fold, firstly on merits where learned Senior Advocate Mr. G.M.Joshi appearing for the petitioner has contended that there is no evidence of any involvement of the petitioner in the escape of under-trial from the custody as the petitioner was not found part of the escort/japta to the hospital from where he made the escape. Secondly, other police personnel who formed the escort group and were only responsible when the under-trial prisoner was hospitalized were also proceeded, but were inflicted with only punishments like withholding of increment or penalty to the tune of Rs.5,000.00 etc. whereas against the petitioner, the effect of order is that of dismissal from service. Therefore, it is argued that the case of the petitioner requires to be reconsider even on the aspect of punishment.

(3.) Learned Senior Advocate for the petitioner in support of his argument has taken this Court through the charges against the petitioner and the inquiry report pursuant to the inquiry and submitted that the only connecting factor of the petitioner that the escape of the under-trial prisoner from the hospital is that the petitioner was in contact on mobile with the under-trial prisoner, his friend, treating doctor of under-trial prisoner and the jailer.