TUNTUN RAI Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In the incident dated 26.05.2001, a First Information Report being Tata Nagar G.R.P. Case No. 31 of 2001 under Section 386/34 of the I.P.C. was registered against three accused persons who are appellants herein namely, Tuntun Rai, Chhedi Paswan and Mir Alimuddin. A departmental proceeding was also initiated against the appellants and all the three appellants have been dismissed from service. Since the necessary facts in these Letters Patent Appeals are common and the impugned order dated 17.12.2008 has been assailed by the appellants on identical grounds, all the appeals have been heard together and are being disposed of by a common order.

(2.) All the appellants were appointed in Railway Police Service on the post of Constable. On 26.05.2001 a First Information Report under Section 386/34 was registered on the allegation that the accused persons (who are appellants herein) had threatened and extorted money from the passengers of "Gitanjali Express Train, 2859 Dn." which was waiting at Tata Nagar Railway Station, Platform No. 4 and when other passengers raised objection they fled away. Vide Memo dated 20.07.2001 the appellants were charged for gross indiscipline, dereliction of duty, suspicious conduct etc. A specific charge of threatening the passengers who were smoking cigarette in Gitanjali Express Train and extorting Rs. 500/ from them, was framed against the appellants. During the departmental enquiry six witnesses were examined on behalf of the Department and on conclusion of the enquiry proceeding, enquiry reports were submitted holding the charges proved against the appellants. Though, it was a common enquiry, separate enquiry reports dated 14.06.2002 and 05.07.2002 were prepared and furnished to the appellants with second showcause notice. By separate penalty orders, that is, dated 20.07.2002, 25.07.2002 and 13.08.2002, the appellants were dismissed from service. They preferred appeal before the Deputy Inspector General of Police, Railway and their appeals have also been rejected by appellate orders dated 03.07.2003, 04.07.2003 and 28.06.2003. By judgment and order dated 05.12.2007 in G.R. Case No. 53 of 2001, the appellants were acquitted from the criminal charges by the Trial Court and thereafter, the appellants approached this Court by filing writ petitions being W.P.(S) No. 3861 of 2003, W.P.(S) No. 1778 of 2003 and W.P. (S) No. 3905 of 2003. By a common order dated 17.12.2008 the writ petitions filed by the appellants have been dismissed and therefore, the appellants have approached this Court by filing the present Letters Patent Appeal. The necessary details in each Letters Patent Appeal are given below:

(3.) Mr. Sumeet Gadodia, the learned counsel appearing for the appellants in L.P.A. No. 16 of 2009 and L.P.A. No. 18 of 2009 advanced the arguments for the appellants and Mrs. Ritu Kumar, the learned counsel appearing for the appellant in L.P.A. No. 14 of 2009 adopted the argument of Mr. Sumeet Gadodia. Ms. Shivani Verma, J.C. to A.G. appeared on behalf of the State of Jharkhand.