KUNAL KISHORE MANDAL Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents.

(2.) Petitioner has challenged the order dtd. 8/3/2015 as contained in memo No.883/Go, passed by the Superintendent of Police, Godda, whereby, on conclusion of the departmental proceeding, petitioner has been punished with stoppage of one increment for six months, which is equivalent to one black mark. It was further ordered that during the period of suspension, petitioner will not be paid any amount except the subsistence allowance. Further the petitioner has also challenged the appellate order dtd. 4/1/2017 as contained in memo No.57/Go passed by the Deputy Inspector General of Police, Santhal Pargana Division, Dumka, whereby the appeal preferred by the petitioner against the order passed by the Disciplinary Authority has been dismissed.

(3.) Petitioner is a police constable. He was chargesheeted vide memo No.934 dtd. 27/6/2014, alleging therein that one Dula Munda, Sub Inspector of Police, had to prepare a report in respect of a non-FIR registered under Sec. 107 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on 31/5/2014, based on a complaint made by Pratima Devi. The said Dular Munda prepared a report to be sent, but the allegation is that the petitioner removed the report and prepared another report in his own handwriting, without containing any signature in the said report. Thus, there is an allegation against this petitioner of tampering with the documents and report. A Departmental Proceeding was initiated, wherein, based on the evidence adduced during the enquiry, the Enquiry Officer found the petitioner guilty of the offence. After issuance of second show cause notice and furnishing the Enquiry Report to the petitioner, petitioner was inflicted with a punishment of stoppage of one increment for six months, which is equivalent to one black mark. It was also ordered that during the period of suspension, he will only be paid the subsistence allowance. A departmental appeal was preferred by the petitioner against the said order of punishment, which was also dismissed.