DILBAGH RAI JARRY Vs. DIVISIONAL SUPERINTENDENT NORTHERN RLY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution in which the order of dismissal made against the petitioner, who was confirmed as a Railway Guard on 19th February, 1952, is challenged.

(2.) THE petitioner was prosecuted for an offence under Section 509, Indian Penal code, for having wished namastey to a lady on a railway platform in circumstances which were not considered proper. He was awarded a sentence of three months' simple imprisonment by the trial Magistrate on 29th December, 1955. His appeal to the Court of Session also failed. On 22nd February, 1956 he approached this court on the, revisional side, but his petition was dismissed on 5th March, 1958 in limine, Thereafter the petitioner was dismissed from service on the ground of his conviction on 31st March, 1956. In April, 1956 the petitioner moved this Court for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court against the order of his conviction. That petition was dismissed. He, however, obtained special leave from their Lordships of the Supreme Court and his appeal was admitted and heard. It was allowed on 7th March, 1957. It was observed by their Lordships that the action of the petitioner was highly imprudent, almost bordering on stupidity or foolhardiness. It was further observed that he had got his due reward in the punishment which had been meted out to him by the three companions of the, lady which had resulted in serious injuries inflicted upon him and his having to remain in the hospital as an indoor patient for well-nigh 38 days. Although his action was deprecated, their lordships did not see their way to convict him of the offence under Section 509, indian. Penal Code. The appeal was allowed, but as her had already undergone a sentence, the conviction recorded against him was quashed.

(3.) THE petitioner's case is that as soon as he filed a petition in this Court for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court he sent information to the Divisional superintendent of Railways on 7th April, 1956 through the Station Master that such a petition was being filed in this Court and that he was seeking leave to appeal to the Supreme Court. Mr. Bhagat Singh Chawla, who appears on behalf of the petitioner, has also produced before me postal and acknowledgement receipts of a letter sent by registered post. There is, however, no mention of these documents in the petition, but the fact remains that some sort of information was sent on 7th April, 1956 through the Station Master. It is denied by the respondents that any such information was ever sent. On the 18th March, 1957 the petitioner, after his acquittal by the Supreme Court, sent a fresh representation in which he brought it to the notice of the authorities concerned that his conviction had been set aside by the Supreme Court and that he should be reinstated. A reply dated 27th June, 1957 was sent to him to the effect that he could not be reinstated. The petitioner filed a departmental appeal which was also dismissed on 23rd December, 1957. The present petition was filed in February, 1958.