AMAL KUMAR BARUAH Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) An order dated 21.7.2001 dismissing the petitioner from service on a charge of bigamy after holding a departmental enquiry into the said charge is the subject of challenge in the present writ petition.

(2.) The facts, in brief, may be noticed at the outset. At the relevant point of time, the petitioner, Shri Amal Kumar Baruah, was working as an Armed Branch Constable. On 3.4.1997 one Srn'ti. Minu Baruah claiming to be the legally married wife of the petitioner submitted a petition before the Superintendent of Police, North Lakhimpur informing the said authority that the petitioner had married another girl on 26.3.97 and, thereafter, he had not been extending any financial assistance to the complainant and her four children. The Superintendent of Police, North Lakhimpur examined the petitioner in his office on 7.4.1997 in the course of which the petitioner allegedly confessed that he had, indeed, contracted a second marriage. Thereafter, a formal charge memo was issued against the petitioner drawing up a departmental proceeding against him on the charge of commission of bigamy and thereby violating the provisions contained in Rule 26 of the Assam Civil Service (Conduct) Rules, 1965.

(3.) Though not on record, the petitioner appears to have filed a written statement wherein the thrust of the explanations offered was with regard to the justification for the second marriage and not the denial thereof. According to the petitioner, his first wife was keeping indifferent health and therefore to enable him to discharge his duties properly and also to look after his four children he was compelled to contract a second marriage. The authority, not being satisfied, appointed an Enquiry Officer to enquire into the charges. The Enquiry Officer recorded the statements of the first wife of the petitioner, Smti. Minu Baruah, and the Reserve Officer and thereafter on the conclusion of the enquiry submitted his report to the effect that the charge against the petitioner stood established. The report of enquiry is dated 6.5.1999. Thereafter, on 7.1.2000 the Disciplinary Authority of the petitioner issued a notice to the petioner enclosing a copy of the Enquiry Officer's report and asking him to show cause as to why he should not be dismissed from service. The petitioner showed cause on consideration of which the impugned order dated 21.7.2001 has been passed which has been assailed in the present writ application.