UNION OF INDIA Vs. MAHENDRA PRASAD DUBEY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) On July 7, 1986 a goods train namely K. P. Dock Special was passing through Naila Railway Station at about 21.08 hours. The train stopped for 14 minutes in absence of a green signal. The train was escorted by two security personnel namely one Sri B. K. Naik and one B. K. Singh. At that point of time the respondent being a R. P. F. constable was posted on the platform of the said railway station. The said train was carrying pig iron. Due to the stoppage of 14 minutes there had been a theft at the said railway station committed by two miscreants who were later on apprehended by the police authority along with the seized goods. According to the respondent when he was resting in his house next morning, he heard hue and cry, raised by the local people. He came out of his residence and found that the said accused persons were carrying pig iron in a handcart. The accused persons were arrested and brought to the railway police station. According to the respondents as per his statements made on December 2,1986 he arrested the accused persons and brought them to the police station.

(2.) The respondent was chargesheeted for negligence in his duty as he failed to prevent and detect the theft of pig iron in course of his duty. The respondent was served with a chargesheet on April 24,1987. By a letter dated May 1,1987 the respondent asked for copies of several documents as according to him those documents were needed to give reply to the chargesheet. The respondent thereafter by his letter dated June 2, 1987 gave his clarification to his superior authority and thereafter submitted his defence on September 26,1987 appearing at pages 52-57 of the paper book. By the said written defence the respondent dealt with the charges brought against him on merits and did not raise any objection with regard to non-furnishing of the documents or with regard to procedural lapses, if any, committed on the part of the management.

(3.) Before the enquiry officer the appellant authority called 5 witnesses to support the charge while the respondent called those two guards namely Sri B.K.Naik and Sri B. K.Singh who escorted the said train on the relevant date. The enquiry officer after analyzing the evidence adduced by the respective witnesses came to a conclusion that the charges were proved. In the said enquiry report, appearing at pages 59-67 of the paper book, the enquiry officer recorded that copies of all the documents and exhibits were given to the delinquent.