AWADHESH KUMAR TIWARI Vs. STATE OF UP

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Sri N.D. Shukla, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the respondent. Counter and rejoinder affidavits have been exchanged between the parties. Although the counter-affidavit filed by the respondent is not available on record. Learned Standing Counsel has provided his copy for perusal of the Court.

(2.) THE petitioner claims to have been appointed as a Constable in U.P. Police Force in 1998 and was posted as Police Constable No. 303 at Reserve Police Line, Varanasi. THE petitioner alleges to have been involved in an offence under Sections 392 and 386 IPC, Police Station Cantt., District Varanasi, Case Crime No. 501 of 2009 dated 7.6.2009 regarding an incident that is alleged to have occurred on 4.6.2009 at 8:30 p.m. when the petitioner is alleged to have snatched two mobile phones from the possession of the complainant. He alleges to have been granted bail on 20.8.2009. However, another F.I.R. was lodged agianst the petitioner on 23.6.2009 as Case Crime No. 545 of 2004, Police Station Cantt., District Varanasi under Section 3(I)(X) of the U.P. Gangster Act, wherein he has been granted bail on 11.9.2009. A third F.I.R. was lodged against the petitioner under Section 386 IPC, Police Station Kotwali, District Varanasi as Case Crime No. 163 of 2009, wherein also he has been granted bail on 24.8.2009. It is alleged that he was served with dismissal order dated 7.6.2009 passed by the Respondent No. 3 and his dismissal has been made by exercising the powers under Section 8(2)(b) of the U.P. Subordinate Police Officers (Punishment and Appeal) Rules, 1991.

(3.) HAVING considered the submission of learned counsel for the parties and perused the record the satisfaction alleged to have been recorded by the authority while passing the impugned order is self explanatory and is quoted hereunder: <IMG>JUDGEMENT_130_ADJ9_2010Image1.jpg</IMG>