SISIR KUMAR DAS Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The facts of this case are briefly as follows: The petitioner was appointed a Sub-inspector of Police, in the Bengal Police Force in 1944. In September 1947, he was posted as a Sub-Inspector of Police at Shalimar Government Railway Police Station. In December 1948, he became the Officer in charge of that Police Station. This Police Station had a malkhana attached to it for keeping goods taken charge of by the Police. These goods are sold after obtaining orders from the District Magistrate unless the goods are perishable, in which case they are sold and the approval of the Magistrate obtained subsequently. The petitioner remained in Shalimar during 1948-49 and a good part of 1950. At the end of 1950 he was transferred to Bankura. In the beginning of 1951 the authorities received some anonymous communications regarding the sales by the petitioner from the Malkhana at Shalimar during his incumbency there as the Officer-in-charge.

(2.) It appears that investigations were set on foot by the Criminal Investigation Department and also there was an enquiry by the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Howrah, Mr. Aswini Kumar Gope. It is disputed whether Mr. Gope had made a report at this stage but I shall come back to this aspect of the matter later on. The order sheet shows that Mr. Gope looked into certain records, and then drew up a list of 'possible charges' and then submitted it to the S. R. P. who approved of the same. In May 1951 the petitioner was called upon to submit his explanation regarding these 'possible charges' (Schedule 'A' to the petition). The petitioner submitted his explanations on or about 11-6-1951. On or about 20-8-1951, Mr. Gope drew up certain formal charges, seven in number. These, being .approved by Mr. S. C. De Chaudhury, the Superintendent, Government Railway Police, Howrah, were served upon the petitioner and he was called upon to explain the same (Schedule 'C'). It might be mentioned here that neither in the proposed charges, nor in the formal charges was it mentioned as to what would happen if any or all the charges were brought home. In other words, nothing was said about punishment.

(3.) The enquiry proceedings were entrusted to Mr. Gope who had drawn up the charges. On 4-9-1951, the petitioner applied to the Superintendent saying that there were enquiries and reports made by C I. D. Officers and Mr. Gope, and these reports should be made available to him. Upon this application, Mr. Gope made the following endorsement (Schedule G and H).