STATE Vs. UGAM SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Court while deciding the Civil Writ Petition No. 197 of 1959 (Madan Singh v. Union of India and others) by its order dated 28-10-1960, directed Bansilal and Ugamsingh to show cause why they should not be prosecuted for swearing and presenting false affidavits in this Court.

(2.) On a complaint lodged by Shri Radhe Shyam, the Train Examiner, Uterlai, Madan Singh was charge-sheeted on 12-2-1958, for misconduct, in a departmental enquiry held on that complaint. Madan Singh cited three witnesses in defence, two of them were Bansilal, fitter and Ugamshigh, Oiler, before the Enquiry Committee, of which Mr. Walters, Carriage and Wagons inspector, was the Chairman. These two persons showed their reluctance to give evidence in presence of Madansingh, as they apprehended that he will take retaliatory action against them, if they stated against him in his presence. The members of the Committee examined these two persons in the absence of Madansingh under Rule 1707 Clause (d) and Rule 49 of the Discipline and Appeal Rules. Their statements were recorded in English and were read over to them and they signed each page of the deposition in acknowledgment of the correctness. The report of the Enquiry Committee was that the charges were proved against Madansingh and that he was guilty of misconduct and indiscipline. This report was considered by the Divisional Mechanical Engineer, who passed an order of removal against Madansingh. Madansingh thereafter presented a writ petition in this Court on 12-5-1959, praying for a writ of certiorari for quashing the order of his dismissal. This writ petition was contested by the opposite parties to this writ petition, and Madansingh submitted a rejoinder along with three affidavits, one of himself and the other two of Bansilal and Ugamsingh. In their affidavits Bansilal and Ugam-singh stated that their statements were not correctly recorded by the Enquiry Committee and they had not stated what had been recorded therein. The affidavit of Bansilal was verified by the Oath Commissioner, Rajasthan High Court, Jodhpur, on 22-8-1960, and the affidavit of Ugamsingh was verified by the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Banner, on 24-8-1960. The opposite parties thereupon filed a reply to the rejoinder with an affidavit of Shri N. M. Walters, Carriage and Wagons Inspector that Bansilal and Ugamsingh had deposed what is con tained in their statements recorded before the Enquiry Committee.

(3.) This Court while deciding the writ petition took the view that there was no reason to disbelieve the statement of Mr. Walters that the above statements recorded by the Committee were correctly recorded and felt satisfied that these persons have subsequently gone back on their statements and had sworn false affidavits.