BINOD KUMAR SINGH Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner challenges the order dated 16.3.2006 passed by the Deputy Inspector General of Police, Imphal (Manipur), whereby, punishment of dismissal from service has been imposed upon him. Order of the appellate authority dated 12.7.2006, dismissing the petitioner's appeal against the order of punishment as well as the order of the revisional authority i.e. Director General of Police, Central Reserve Police Force, New Delhi, dismissing the petitioner's revision petition against the order of the disciplinary authority as well as the appellate authority is also under challenge. On the allegation that during the subsistence of the petitioner's marriage with Ranju Singh, he contracted second marriage with a constable in Central Reserve Police Force, which is a misconduct under Section 11(1) of the Central Reserve Police Force Act, 1949, a disciplinary proceeding was initiated against the petitioner. The disciplinary proceeding was initiated on the basis of a complaint made by his wife Ranju Singh. It was also alleged against him that he prepared a forged document to make out a case that his marriage with Ranju Singh stood dissolved by a decree of divorce on mutual consent. There were altogether four charges framed against the petitioner. All revolved around his conduct of marrying another lady during the subsistence of his earlier marriage.

(2.) It appears from the pleadings of the writ application that neither cause of action, leading to the filing of the present application has arisen within the territorial jurisdiction of this Court nor Offices of any of the respondents are situate within the territorial jurisdiction of this Court. This writ application could have been dismissed on the ground of territorial jurisdiction but since no preliminary objection has been raised on behalf of the respondents to this effect in the counter affidavit or in course of oral submission, I proceed to adjudicate upon the matter particularly, as it has remained pending for nearly seven years before this Court.

(3.) The Inquiry Officer after conducting the departmental enquiry submitted his report, holding that the charges levelled against him stood proved on the basis of evidence on record. The disciplinary authority i.e. Deputy Inspector General of Police, Central Reserve Police Force, Imphal vide his order dated 16.3.2006 imposed upon the petitioner the punishment of his dismissal from service. The petitioner's appeal and revision petition were also dismissed by orders dated 12.6.2007, 12.7.2006 and 20.3.2007 which are under challenge in the present writ application.