BHARAT PRASAD YADAV Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant case has been taken up for consideration through the mode of Video conferencing in view of the prevailing situation on account of COVID 19 Pandemic, requiring social distancing.

(2.) The present writ petition has been filed for quashing the order dtd. 4/4/2019, passed by the Deputy Inspector General of Police, Munger Range, Munger, whereby and whereunder the petitioner has been dismissed from service. The petitioner has also prayed for quashing of the appellate order dtd. 11/7/2019, passed by the Inspector General of Police, Bhagalpur Range, Bhagalpur and the order dtd. 10/12/2019, passed by the Director General of Police, Bihar, Patna, whereby and whereunder the Memorial filed by the petitioner has been rejected.

(3.) The brief facts of the case are that a video clip had become viral on 14/11/2018, wherein the petitioner was seen consuming some substance akin to liquor and was thus suspended on the very same day vide order dtd. 14/11/2018, passed by the Superintendent of Police, Sheikhpura. In fact, one F.I.R. bearing Karandey PS case no. 42 of 2018 was also instituted against the petitioner on 15/11/2018 under Sec. 37(b) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016. The Superintendent of Police, Sheikhpura, vide letter dtd. 21/11/2018, had issued a show cause notice to the petitioner calling upon him to file his reply as to why a disciplinary proceeding be not initiated against him. The petitioner had filed his reply denying all the charges, whereafter a preliminary inquiry is stated to have been conducted and a report was submitted by the Superintendent of Police, Sheikhpura on 22/11/2018, wherein it was stated that on 14/11/2018, a video had become viral on whatsApp, wherein the petitioner was seen drinking liquor, hence for the purposes of inquiry, the room of the petitioner was searched and it was found that the room, which was visible in the viral video is similar to the room of the residence of the petitioner and from the video it appeared that the petitioner was drinking liquor, although liquor is banned in the State of Bihar. The disciplinary authority had then issued a charge-sheet dtd. 23/11/2018, wherein allegation was leveled against the petitioner regarding him having consumed liquor, although the same was banned in the State of Bihar resulting in him bringing disrepute to the entire Police Department. The petitioner had then filed his reply, whereafter, the inquiry had commenced and after conclusion of the same, the Inquiry Officer had filed his inquiry report dtd. 20/12/2018, wherein though two witnesses had been examined on behalf of the prosecution, one being the investigating officer of the aforesaid Karandey PS case no. 42 of 2018 and the other being the informant of the said case namely Arjun Prasad, nonetheless they had failed to adduce any concrete or cogent evidence to substantiate the factum of them having either seen the petitioner drinking liquor or being in possession of any tangible proof to prove the fact that the petitioner was drinking liquor on the alleged date and time of occurrence and had on the contrary, merely stated that a video had become viral, wherein the petitioner was seen consuming liquor. No other oral or documentary evidence was adduced by the prosecution except for the inquiry report of the informant of the aforesaid criminal case dtd. 15/11/2018, which is also of no relevance.