KAMAL SINGH MEENA Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is aggrieved of the order dated 19.06.2015, passed by the Additional Chief Security Commissioner, Northeast Frontier Railway, Maligaon, Guwahati whereby he has been discharged from training after being recruited as a Constable in the Railway Protection Special Force (hereinafter "RPSF") for the purported reason of his character and antecedent verification exercise eliciting information from the D.M., Alwar that Police Case No. 119/07 for offences under Sections 143, 323, 324, 341 IPC was instituted against him at Kotkashim Police Station and he was under trial therefor. It was further stated in the impugned order that the aforesaid fact, having been suppressed and not set out in the Attestation Form submitted by the petitioner, entailed violation of para No. 3 of the Attestation Form consequent to which he was rendered unfit for Government service as per Rule 52.2 & 67.2 of Railway Protection Force Rules, 1987 (hereinafter "the Rules of 1987") and liable to be discharged with immediate effect.

(2.) The facts not in dispute are that the petitioner was selected to the post of Constable in RPSF and called up for training vide letter dated 05.10.2014 which he joined on 01.11.2014. Four months thereafter on or about 25.05.2015, the petitioner was served a letter requiring him to report to Headquarter of 4th Battalion, RPSF, New Jalpaiguri for further orders. The petitioner thereafter by the impugned order dated 19.07.2015 was discharged from service.

(3.) What now transpires from the petition is that a criminal case No. 53/2009 (FIR No. 119/2007) was registered at Police Station Kotkashim where under the petitioner along with his family members was made an accused for alleged offences under Sections 143, 323, 324, 341 IPC resulting from an altercation in front of his house. On completion of investigation, the petitioner was challaned for offences under Sections 148, 323-323/149, 324, 341 IPC as were others. The incident apparently being one between two groups in the village, the criminal case was compromised qua offences under Sections 341 and 323 IPC. In the course of trial for the remainder offences, all prosecution witnesses including the complainant himself turned hostile and refused to regurgitate their case and in fact totally disavowed it. Consequently, the petitioner and other were acquitted by the trial court vide judgment dated 06.04.2010.