KRISHNA SINGH Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties.

(2.) One Devanti Devi reported to the Rampur Police Station on 8.3.1992 that she has been robbed of her ear-ring, one black and white television made by Salora Company, one fan, one tape recorder and gold chain by the petitioner on the threat of revolver in his hand. On the basis of this information a First Information Report was submitted and accordingly Rampur P.S. Case No. 25/92 was registered. This information having been brought to the notice of disciplinary authority of the petitioner, a disciplinary proceeding was instituted against the petitioner. In the Rampur P.S. Case a charge-sheet was filed on which cognizance was taken and petitioner having denied the charges the trial commenced. In the department proceeding the petitioner having denied the charges levelled against him in the charge-sheet, an enquiry proceedings started. These were permitted to continue simultaneously. Before the enquiry officer Devanti Devi and her husband Nand Kishore Sao came as prosecution witnesses. Devanti Devi stated in her. examination-in-chief that she suddenly awoke up and found somebody wanted to take away her ear-ring with a revolver in his hand. She also stated that in the electric light she identified the petitioner who lived in the Postmaster's room. In cross-examination she stated that she knew him from before and therefore she was able to recognise him in the electric light. Shri Nand Kishore Sao stated in his examination before the enquiry officer that he was sleeping in his shop and his wife Devanti Devi was sleeping in the varandah and she told him that the petitioner having revolver in his hand escaped with her ear-ring. On the basis of this evidence, ignoring the plea of the petitioner to keep the departmental proceeding pending till judgment by the criminal Court, enquiry officer submitted his report and held the petitioner guilty of the charges levelled against him.

(3.) There is no dispute that on the basis of such finding the petitioner has been punished by way of dismissal from service. Subsequent thereto, the prosecution produced Devanti Devi and Nand Kishore Sao as the only prosecution witnesses before the criminal Court when both the prosecution witnesses were declared hostile by the prosecution. Smt. Devanti Devi in her examination stated that she saw one person snatching her ear-ring but she did not identify the person. She also stated about two others but at the same time stated that she could not identify any of them. Her husband Nand Kishore Sao also stated in his evidence that he did not see nor identify anybody taking away the articles. Before the criminal Court the Investigation Officer was not examined. In such a situation the criminal Court had no other option but to conclude that on the basis of materials before him there is no other alternative but to come to the conclusion that the charges against the petitioner have not been proved beyond reasonable doubt.