DILSHAD ALI Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner while serving as a Lecturer in Geography, was involved in an FIR No. 246 dated 07.12.1996 for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 406 and 498A of the Indian Penal Code, registered at Police Station, Sarabha Nagar, Ludhiana. Charge -sheet was filed in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Ludhiana. On the conclusion of the trial, he was convicted for both the offences and was awarded sentence to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for a period of six months and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/ - under Section 406 of the Indian Penal Code and in default of payment of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven days. He was further sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/ - under section 498A of the Indian Penal Code and in default of payment of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven days. The petitioner preferred Criminal Appeal No. 18 of 04.05.2004 before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ludhiana. Learned counsel for the petitioner did not contest the appeal on merits and only prayed for release of the accused -petitioner on probation, pleading that he is the only bread earner of the family. It was further pleaded that the petitioner's wife had already taken divorce from him and he is working as a Lecturer. On this statement being made, the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ludhiana, while upholding the judgment of the learned Trial Court, ordered the release of the petitioner on probation on furnishing a bond in the sum of Rs. 10,000/ - with one surety in the like amount for a period of one year and to keep peace and be of good behavior and to come and receive sentence as and when called upon to do so, vide order dated 20.08.2008. By releasing the petitioner on probation, his appeal was dismissed.

(2.) ON his conviction in the aforementioned criminal case for the offences under Sections 406 and 498A of the Indian Penal Code, the petitioner has been ordered to be dismissed from service vide the impugned order dated 19.11.2008. Legality and validity of the impugned order dated 19.11.2008 (Annexure P -2) is under challenge in the present writ petition.

(3.) FROM the perusal of the impugned order dated 19.11.2008 (Annexure P -2), it is evident that dismissal of the petitioner from service is solely on his conviction in the criminal offence and the government instructions dated 05.08.1998, which, inter -alia, permit the dismissal of the government employee on his conviction without any departmental enquiry.