RAMJEE PRASAD Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, who is police Inspector, has approached this Court by invoking the writ jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India assailing the order dated 12.05.2011 passed by the Deputy Inspector General of Police, Special Branch, Jharkhand, Ranchi, Annexure-6 to the petition as well as order dated 26.09.2011 passed by the Inspector General of Police, Special Branch, Jharkhand, Ranchi, Annexation-8 to the petition, whereby punishment of stoppage of two increments for 6(six) months was imposed on the petitioner with stipulation that it shall be treated as one black mark and thereafter statutory appeal filed by the petitioner was also dismissed. Brief facts of the case, inter alia, are that Anil Kumar, son of late Mathura Prasad Singh, had applied for issuance of passport The petitioner was to make inquiries and verification of the address and antecedent of the applicant Anil Kumar in connection with the issuance of Passport. Accordingly, petitioner has verified the temporary address of the applicant as C/o Naresh Rai, Barganda near Sai Baba Mandir, Giridih. However, he has recommended to get verification of his permanent address of village Pura, Post Office Khaddi Lodipur, P.S. Telhada, District Nalanda (Bihar) done by the Bihar police, before issuing the passport. Anil Kumar has lodged a complaint against the petitioner, Police Inspector, stating that for giving verification report in his favour, he has demanded Rs. 8000/- as bribe and out of Rs. 8000/- Rs. 5000/- were paid to the petitioner through Sri Dilip Kumar, who is engaged in the business of helping the people in getting passport. On the complaint, the petitioner was charge sheeted for demanding bribe of Rs. 8000/- and accepting Rs. 5000/- and submitting a wrong verification report against the applicant Anil Kumar for non-payment of complete bribe money.

(2.) The petitioner has denied the charges.

(3.) During the enquiry Dilip Kumar had appeared before the Inquiry Officer and has stated that he was present in the house of Anil Kumar, when petitioner had come for verification; petitioner had demanded Rs. 8000/- for favourable verification; Anil Kumar had given Rs. 5000/- to him and in turn he had handed over the said amount of Rs. 5000/- to the petitioner.