ALAKH SINHA Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this petition, petitioner has prayed for quashment of the order (P-13) of his removal from service from the post of Civil Judge, Class-I.

(2.) PETITIONER was appointed as Civil Judge in the year 1983 and was promoted as Civil Judge Class-I in the year 1991. High Court of Madhya Pradesh initiated departmental enquiry as per memo (P-l ). Charge-sheet (P-2) was issued containing 14 charges. Statement of imputation (P-3) and enquiry report (P-4) was submitted. Out of 14 charges, 11 charges related to lapse in judicial work. Petitioner filed a reply (P-5 ). Charge Nos. 7, 9 and 13 were also not proved. Charge No. 1 related to grant of interim injunction in violation of legal principles. Charge No. 2 is with respect to delay in deciding three cases. Charge No. 3 related to passing an order of discharge in a case under Section 307 read with Section 149 of the IPC and instead a charge under Section 326/149 was framed and petitioner proceeded with trial himself. Charge No. 4 related to deciding Criminal Case Nos. 8100/86,187/86 against all cannons of justice and acquitted the accused. Charge No. 5 related to keeping himself present after appointing the Commissioner for local investigation at the spot in the Civil Suit No. 108/1993 and took part in taking measurement which shows undue interest in the case. Charge No. 6 related to purchase of second-hand car from lawyer; Shri Sudhir Pathak, who was practising in his Court and was not merely a press representative which petitioner had claimed in his application for grant of permission for purchase of car. Charge No. 8 related to purchase of a car for Rs. 80,000/- from Anil Deshpande of Indore and obtaining permission by misrepresenting to the High Court. Charge No. 10 related to discharge of accused persons who were alleged to have committed various offences under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 which was not triable by the petitioner. Charge No. 11 related to illegally granting bail in Criminal Case No. 272/91 (State v. Suresh ). Charge No. 12 related to Criminal Case No. 232/92 (State v. Narayan and Ors. ,) which was a case under Section 326 of the IPC. Petitioner granted bail of which he had no power since that was an offence punishable with imprisonment for life. Charge No. 14 related to awarding inadequate punishment in a case punishable under Sections 338 and 304-A of the IPC and those under Section 7 read with Section 16 of Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, which shows inefficiency or lack of integrity and amounts to grave misconduct.

(3.) PETITIONER has submitted that so far as charges in relation to judicial work are concerned, no party or lawyer has made any grievance. Shri C. S. Gupta has dragged the charges to harass the petitioner malafidely. Committal Court has not to act as a post office, but, to apply his mind. Thus, no misconduct was made out while charge under Section 326 was framed though challan was filed under Section 307, IPC. Acquittals made in Food Adulteration cases were not challenged, non-compliance under Section 13 (2) was not the only ground. In civil suit both the parties had prayed for inspection of spot by the petitioner, hence, no misconduct was committed. While in the case in charge No. 10, challan was filed under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, on perusal petitioner found that no offence under the Act was made out. Therefore took cognizance of offence under the Indian Penal Code. May be that entertaining the challan was not strictly legal, but the same was done as per orders of the then District Judge; who had directed that even in those cases, the accused should be committed. Charge No. 11 is incorrect as bail was granted by First Addl. Sessions Judge, Sehore. With respect to charge No. 12 as the police has sought remand of accused for offence under Section 325, IPC, therefore, bail was granted by the petitioner. Latter, while filing the challan, the police converted the offence under Section 325 to one under Section 326 of the IPC.