Delhi District Court
Criminal Case/7/2008 on 9 August, 2011
FIR No. 7/2008 1 PS EOW/Crime Branch
IN THE COURT OF SH. MANISH GUPTA, ADDL. CHIEF
METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE (OUTER DISTRICT), ROHINI
COURTS , DELHI
FIR No. 7/2008
Police Station EOW/Crime Branch
Under Section 420/120B/34 IPC
State v. Ram Chander Gulia & Ors.
09.08.2011
ORDER ON CHARGE
1.I have already heard arguments on the point of charge and perused the record.
2. Chargesheet in the present case was filed on behalf of the state on 13.3.2008 and after taking cognizance of the offence, the accused persons were summoned. Initially the chargesheet was filed against nine accused persons namely (1). SI Ram Chander Gulia, (2). ASI/RPF Pale Ram, (3). Mahender Pal, (4). Joginder Dahiya @ Jocky, (5). Rajesh, (6). Rajender, (7). Deepak, (8). Anand @ Rinku and (9). Jagminder. Subsequently the supplementary chargesheet has been filed on behalf of state only on 23.6.2011. The said supplementary chargesheet was with respect to 13 accused persons namely (1). Harsh Contd.....
FIR No. 7/2008 2 PS EOW/Crime Branch Dev, (2). Sanjay Rana, (3). Vicky, (4). Ashok Kumar, (5). Rajneesh Yadav @ Tillu, (6). Ashok Saini, (7). Narveer, (8). Umed Singh, (9). Sandeep, (10). Rakesh Kumar, (11). Narender Kumar, (12). Amit Kumar and (13). Zile Singh.
3. As on date all the 22 accused persons are on bail.
4. The allegations as mentioned in the chargesheet are that on 13.1.2008 a complaint was received from complainant Shri Hari Om Rana alleging that his brotherinlaw Shri Neeraj Dabas S/o Shri Dharampal Dabas who resides in village Puth Khurd, Delhi has passed physical test of Delhi Police SubInspector exam and he is preparing for written test which would be held at 9:00 AM on 13.1.2008 and one Sahib Singh S/o Shri Kartar Singh who resides opposite to the complainant's house in house number 747 and is a constable in Delhi Police told him that he can make the selection of the willing candidate as guaranteed and on this the complainant informed him that his brother inlaw Neeraj has filled the form and thereafter Sahib Singh told him that he has to pass physical test himself and he would leak the written test paper through his acquaintance SI Ram Chander Gulia who had managed the selection of many candidates earlier also. It is further Contd.....
FIR No. 7/2008 3 PS EOW/Crime Branch mentioned that the complainant was influenced by him and after his brotherinlaw cleared the physical proficiency test he met Sahib Singh who fixed his meeting at the residence of SI Ram Chander Gulia, House No. A1/127, Second Floor, Sector11, Rohini, Delhi where two other persons were also present alongwith SI Ram Chander Gulia and one of them introduced himself as Pale Ram and other introduced himself as J.K. Dahiya and all the three accused persons asked him to pay Rs. 15 lacs for leaking the written test paper of SubInspector Delhi Police and told him that they would take Rs. Ten lacs as advance and remaining amount of Rs. Five lacs after selection of the candidate. The money was agreed to be paid and it was asked that payment is to be made after two days to SI Ram Chander Gulia and on 8.1.2008 the complainant withdrew Rs. Ten lacs from his mother's account from Delhi Co operative Bank and reached SI Ram Chander Gulia's residence and according to prearranged programme he paid Rs. Ten lacs to the said three persons and SI Ram Chander Gulia gave him a receipt of Rs. Ten lacs on the backside of his visiting card and said three persons told him that they would contact him telephonicaly one day prior to written examination and on 12.1.2008 SI Ram Chander Gulia asked him on phone to reach near police station Sarai Rohilla alongwith Neeraj at 10:30 AM but he did not find anyone there. Complainant alleged that SI Contd.....
FIR No. 7/2008 4 PS EOW/Crime Branch Ram Chander Gulia, Pale Ram, J.K. Dahiya and Sahib Singh in conspiracy with each other has cheated him for Rs. Ten lacs on the pretext of leaking the written test paper of SubInspector of Delhi Police and neither they provided him the written paper nor returned his money. He prayed for legal action and stated that he can identify them if brought before him and his money be recovered and returned to him. On the basis of said complaint the present case was got registered at PS EOW, Delhi.
5. It is further mentioned that the complainant produced the receipt of Rs. Ten lacs which was seized and during the course of investigation SI Ram Chander Gulia S/o Shri Daya Chand was arrested who had issued the receipt of Rs. Ten lacs on his visiting card and Rs. Two lacs were also recovered from his house on his instance which he had received as his share out of the said amount of Rs. Ten lacs and further on the basis of information provided by SI Ram Chander Gulia, accused Rajesh S/o Umed Singh who was under training constable at PTS, Wazirabad, Delhi and accused Rajinder S/o Shri Ram Chander were also arrested from outside the house of accused ASI Pale Ram and Rs. Two lacs and Rs. One lac were recovered from their respective possession which they have received from ASI Pale Ram as their Contd.....
FIR No. 7/2008 5 PS EOW/Crime Branch respective shares for introducing the potential candidate i.e. Gajender who paid Rs. Ten lacs to accused ASI Pale Ram for getting the paper of SI Delhi Police. It is further alleged that accused Rajesh had also disclosed that he had managed his recruitment as constable in Delhi Police by leaking the paper and on the basis of information and recovery effected from the above mentioned accused persons, accused ASI Pale Ram S/o Surat Singh was apprehended and arrested and Rs. 15 lacs were recovered from his house at his instance which he had collected from different potential candidates and a diary maintained by ASI Pale Ram which mentions the names and the amounts received by him for recruitment in "Delhi Police" , RPF and Chandigarh Police for different posts was also recovered alongwith number of photocopies of admission cards for SI Delhi Police written test from his house at his instance. It is also mentioned that during further investigation and on the basis of material and information available on record, under training constable Deepak S/o Shri Jai Narain and under training constable Jagminder S/o Shri Sukhvir Singh who had also managed to get the written test paper by paying Rs. 2.5 lacs each to one Joginder Dahiya through Anand @ Rinku for their recruitment as constable in Delhi Police, were also arrested and the in depth enquiry added to arrest of accused Anand @ Contd.....
FIR No. 7/2008 6 PS EOW/Crime Branch Rinku S/o Shri Naresh Khatri and accused Joginder Dahiya @ Jocky S/o Shri Mukhtiyar Singh.
6. It is further alleged in the chargesheet that thereafter a reliable information was received regarding one Mahender Pal who was instrumental in getting seven candidates of his area to get through the written examination of constable by providing them with the written test paper in lieu of Rs. Five lacs per head and further he had also collected Rs. 37.5 lacs on the pretext of getting his own son and two other persons namely Jile S/o Shri Suresh @ Ramavtar and Krishan S/o Shri Puran Mal selected as SubInspector Delhi Police by providing them written examination paper which he could not procure from his further links. It is further mentioned that Puran Mal had also submitted his written statement corroborating the facts mentioned above and the accused Mahender Pal S/o Ram Kumar has also been arrested. It is mentioned in the main chargesheet that as per the investigation conducted so far, sufficient evidence against all the accused persons have surfaced on record to charge them u/s 420/120B/34 IPC. It is further mentioned that the investigation of the case is still in progress and few arrests are likely to be made and supplementary chargesheet against rest of the accused persons, if arrested, shall be submitted in future. The said Contd.....
FIR No. 7/2008 7 PS EOW/Crime Branch chargesheet is signed by Inspector Sanjiv Parmar, Special Team, Crime Branch, Prashant Vihar, Delhi and forwarded for trial by ACP, Special Team, Crime Branch. The date on which it is forwarded is 12.3.2008.
7. Subsequently, the supplementary chargesheet was filed by Inspector Bhaskar Sharma, AHS, Crime Branch, Sector18, Rohini, Delhi, PIS No. 16950194 and the same is forwarded by Shri V.K. Dham, ACP, AHS (Anti Homicide Section), Sector18, Rohini, Delhi. The same is forwarded by ACP, Crime Branch on 22.6.2011 and it was filed before the court on 23.6.2011 as already mentioned above. It is relevant to note here that the original challan was filed on 13.3.2008 and the supplementary challan has been filed on 23.6.2011. The gap between the two dates is of three years and three months approximately.
8. The copies of the main challan as well as supplementary challan have already been supplied to all the 22 accused persons.
9. The supplementary chargesheet was filed against 13 accused persons in total out of which six accused persons were on bail Contd.....
FIR No. 7/2008 8 PS EOW/Crime Branch and seven accused persons were not arrested, however, as on date all the accused persons are on bail.
10. Apart from reiteration of the facts as mentioned in the main chargesheet, it is further mentioned in the supplementary chargesheet that on 15.3.2008 accused Harsh Dev S/o Harphool Singh whose name surfaced from the disclosure statement of accused Mahender Pal surrendered before the Hon'ble Court of Shri M.C. Gupta, Ld. ACMM (as he then was) and accused Harsh Dev was interrogated and arrested and disclosure statement was recorded and accused Harsh Dev was confronted with the accused Mahender Pal and as per their disclosure statements they were working on the directions of one Jatin @ Neetu S/o Shri Desh Raj and they used to take money from potential candidates and took these candidates to said Jatin @ Neetu who provided solved written papers to these candidates and in turn Jatin @ Neetu gave them their share of money. It is further mentioned that all efforts were made and raids were conducted on the address of accused Jatin @ Neetu and it was learnt from his mother that he does not stay there and the family has nothing to do with him as he is engaged in criminal activities and since his address was not available, hence, P.O. proceedings could not be initiated.
Contd.....
FIR No. 7/2008 9 PS EOW/Crime Branch
11. It is further mentioned that on 3.6.2008 raid was conducted and accused Sanjay Rana, associate of accused Joginder Dahiya, whose involvement in case cropped up from disclosure statement of accused Joginder Dahiya was apprehended and arrested and the disclosure statement was recorded.
12. It is further mentioned that as per disclosure statement of accused Joginder Dahiya and accused Sanjay Rana it was revealed that they use to procure the solved written test paper from one Ramesh Dahiya S/o Shri Vijay Singh and accordingly all efforts were made to trace and arrest the accused Ramesh Dahiya and raid was also conducted at his address, however, it was learnt that accused Ramesh Dahiya has left the country on 5.2.2008 and, therefore, look out notice and open dated warrants have been issued against the accused Ramesh Dahiya.
13. It is further mentioned in the supplementary chargesheet that on 26.2.2009 NBWs were got issued against suspects Narveer, Rakesh, Sandeep, Umed, Amit, Narender and Zile Singh R/o Village and P.O. Bocharia, Teh. Narnol, Distt. Mahendergarh, Haryana, whose names surfaced from the disclosure statement of accused Contd.....
FIR No. 7/2008 10 PS EOW/Crime Branch Mahender Pal and all the suspects were made to join the investigation and all of them denied the allegations levelled against them and they were thoroughly interrogated and were also subjected to polygraph test and in the report of polygraph test none of the suspects has shown deception in answering the questions. It is also mentioned that the details of all the candidates in written test as well as in interview were also called and analysed and all the candidates secured more than 50 marks out of 60 in the written test but could not secure good marks in the interview as compared to written test except suspect Zile Singh who has secured 8.5 out of 10 in interview.
14. It is further mentioned in the supplementary chargesheet that CDR (Call Detail Report) of accused persons was also collected and analysed. It is further mentioned in the supplementary chargesheet that the analysis of the CDR and the disclosure statement revealed that the accused Ramesh Dahiya was the king pin and master mind of this nexus and two independent modules of Joginder Dahiya @ Jocky and Jatin @ Nitoo were operating under him in Delhi and Rewari (Haryana) respectively. It is further mentioned that Joginder Dahiya @ Jocky and Jatin Yadav @ Nitoo used to procure solved question papers from accused Ramesh Dahiya and they used to sell the same to the Contd.....
FIR No. 7/2008 11 PS EOW/Crime Branch potential candidates brought by their local agents and in case of module of accused Joginder Dahiya @ Jocky, local agents were accused SI Ram Chander Gulia, accused Pale Ram, accused Rajesh, accused Rajender and accused Anand while in case of module of accused Jatin Yadav @ Nittoo local agents were accused Mahender Pal and accused Harsh Dev.
15. It is further mentioned in the supplementary chargesheet that the diary recovered from the accused Pale Ram and visiting card of accused SI Ram Chander Gulia were sent to FSL for comparison with specimen hand writing of accused Pale Ram, accused SI Ram Chander Gulia and accused Rajinder Singh and the result has been received which is as under: >The person (SI Ram Chander Gulia) who wrote red enclosed writing and signatures stamped and marked S1 to S6 also wrote the red enclosed writing/signature similarly stamped & marked Q1. >Similarities are observed between questioned writing Q3 to Q8 (accused Pale Ram) and specimen hand writing of accused Pale Ram. Possibility that Q3 to Q8 and S13 to S15 have been written by one and the same person cannot be ruled out.
Contd.....
FIR No. 7/2008 12 PS EOW/Crime Branch
16. It is further mentioned in the supplementary chargesheet that as per the investigation and material on record it is clear that accused Joginder Dahiya @ Jocky, accused Pale Ram, accused SI Ram Chander Gulia, accused Rajesh, accused Anand and accused Rajender Singh had hatched a criminal conspiracy with accused Ramesh Dahiya to leak the written test paper of constable 2006 and 2007 and SI Delhi Police 2008 and has provided the solved question papers to the potential candidates i.e. accused Deepak, accused Jagminder and accused Rajesh against money as a result of which accused Deepak, Jagminder and Rajesh were selected as constable in Delhi Police by using unfair means and similarly accused Mahender Pal, accused Harsh Dev, accused Ashok Saini and accused Jatin Yadav @ Nittoo had hatched a criminal conspiracy with accused Ramesh Dahiya to leak the written test paper of constable 2007 and SI Delhi Police 2008 and has provided the solved question papers to the potential candidates i.e. accused Rajnish Yadav, accused Ashok Kumar, accused Vicky, accused Narveer, accused Rakesh, accused Sandeep, accused Umed, accused Amit, accused Narender and accused Zile Singh as a result of which accused Rajneesh Yadav, Ashok Kumar, Vicky and suspect Narveer, suspect Rakesh, suspect Sandeep, suspect Umed, suspect Amit, suspect Contd.....
FIR No. 7/2008 13 PS EOW/Crime Branch Narender and suspect Zile Singh were selected as constable Delhi Police by using unfair means.
17. The seizure memo of the visiting card belonging to accused Ram Chander Gulia (SI Delhi Police) is on record. The statement/complaint of Shri Puran Mal Yadav S/o Shri Gangadin Yadav is on record in which it is alleged that on 6.1.2008 he has paid a sum of Rs. 25 lacs to Mahender Pal and his associate Harsh and it is mentioned that Harsh and Mahender have obtained the said amount of Rs. 25 lacs on the pretext that they will get the paper of Delhi Police (SI) leaked and shall provide the same to Puran Mal and neither the paper was provided nor the money was returned.
18. Seizure memo of Rs. Two lacs cash recovered at the instance of Ram Chander Gulia is also on record. Seizure memo of Rs. One lac cash recovered at the instance of accused Rajinder is also on record. The seizure memo of Rs. Two lacs cash recovered at the instance of accused Rajesh Malik is also on record. The seizure memo of Rs. 15 lacs recovered at the instance of accused Pale Ram is also on record. Seizure memo of bank statement produced by the complainant Shri Hari Om Rana with respect to withdrawal of Rs. Ten lacs from Contd.....
FIR No. 7/2008 14 PS EOW/Crime Branch bank account of Smt. Khajani from which the said amount was withdrawn and paid to the accused persons is also on record. The seizure memo of the diary belonging to accused Pale Ram is also on record. The seizure memo of photocopies of admit cards recovered from the house of accused Pale Ram is also on record. Disclosure statement of accused Ram Chander Gulia and accused Pale Ram are also on record. The supplementary disclosure statement of accused Pale Ram is also on record. The disclosure statements of accused Rajesh Malik, Rajinder, Deepak, Anand Kumar, Jagminder, Joginder Dahiya @ Jocky, Mahender Pal, Harsh Dev, Sanjay Rana, Vicky, Ashok Kumar, Rajnish Yadav and Ashok Saini are also on record.
19. Report of FSL is also on record. Moreover the Polygraph (liedetection) examination report with respect to accused Umed, Sandeep, Rakesh Kumar, Narveer, Zile Singh, Amit Kumar and Narender Kumar is also on record which shows that there is no deception on the part of the said accused persons with respect to the answers given by them to the questions to which they were subjected.
20. During the course of arguments it was argued on behalf of accused persons that no confirmation has been made by the Contd.....
FIR No. 7/2008 15 PS EOW/Crime Branch police regarding paper leakage and the complaint of Shri Puran Mal is undated. The counsel for the accused Mahender Pal submitted that it is not mentioned in supplementary chargesheet as to what was the reliable information against Mahender Pal. Mahender Pal is stated to be a steno in degree college. It was also argued that the IO kept silent from March, 2008 to June, 2011. The counsel for the accused Mahender Pal referred to the CDR analysis of accused Harsh Dev and Mahender Pal.
21. The counsel for the accused Sanjay Rana also referred to the CDR of Sanjay Rana and submitted that there is no recovery from him and no complaint and no evidence is there against the accused except for disclosure statement.
22. The counsel for the accused Anand @ Rinku argued that there is only disclosure statement against the accused and there is no complaint or any incriminating evidence against accused.
23. The counsel for the accused Mahender Pal was also the counsel for seven accused persons who were not arrested as per the supplementary chargesheet. The counsel also highlighted the polygraph test result of said seven accused persons.
Contd.....
FIR No. 7/2008 16 PS EOW/Crime Branch
24. The counsel for accused Rajnish Yadav also argued that there no complaint against him and there is no conspiracy on his part. He also referred to the polygraph test.
25. Counsel for the accused Ram Chander Gulia fairly submitted that the accused wants to face the trial.
26. The counsel for the accused Deepak and Jagminder submitted that they want to adopt the arguments as addressed on behalf of accused Anand. I have also gone through the written arguments filed on behalf of accused Jagminder and Deepak.
27. The counsel for the accused Ashok Kumar and Vicky submitted that these accused persons are not named in the main chargesheet and there is only disclosure statement against them and nothing has been recovered from them and there is no allegation of cheating and conspiracy against them. It was also argued that they are on the same footing as of accused Rajnish Yadav.
Contd.....
FIR No. 7/2008 17 PS EOW/Crime Branch
28. The counsel for the accused Harsh Dev submitted that he adopts the arguments as advanced on behalf of accused Mahender Pal.
29. The counsel for accused Ashok Saini submitted that he adopts arguments as advanced on behalf of accused Ashok Kumar, Vicky and Rajnish Yadav. He also argued that no recovery has been effected from the accused Ashok Saini and there is no evidence against him except for disclosure statement.
30. The counsel for accused Joginder Dahiya argued that there is no evidence against accused and there is only disclosure statement and no document or paper was recovered from accused and it was not verified as to who leaked the main paper. He also argued that the prosecution has failed to establish the ownership of mobile phone. The counsel for accused Joginder Dahiya also argued that the volvo bus was also not taken into police possession and the bus number is not mentioned and it was not verified as to who was the driver of the bus and there is no linking of evidence and it is not disclosed as to who was the paper setter. He also submitted that the paper has not been cancelled. The counsel for the accused also argued that the visiting card Contd.....
FIR No. 7/2008 18 PS EOW/Crime Branch was signed by Ram Chander Gulia and submitted that no offence is made out against accused Joginder Dahiya.
31. The counsel for the accused Pale Ram, Rajesh and Rajender submitted that they concede charge and want to face trial.
32. On the other hand the Ld. APP for state submitted that statement/complaint of Puran Mal is having the clear allegations against accused Harsh Dev and Mahender Pal. He also argued that accused Ram Chander Gulia and Pale Ram are public servants. Ld. APP also relied upon the judgement cited as AIR 1973 SC 488 which refers to Section 409 of IPC and in the said case the cashier in possession of safe with all its keys was held guilty u/s 409 IPC as there was embezzlement of cash and there was no evidence to show that he had parted with keys before the incident. Ld. APP also referred to the provisions of Section 405 to 409 of IPC and argued that there is also abetment of criminal breach of trust on the part of accused persons. He also argued that the accomplice is a competent witness. In this regard Ld. APP relied upon the judgement cited as 1952 Cri.L.J. 747 of the Hon'ble Allahabad High Court. Ld. APP also referred to the provisions of Sections 107,108, 119, Contd.....
FIR No. 7/2008 19 PS EOW/Crime Branch 120 of IPC and submitted that the abetment of abetment is also possible. Ld. APP also submitted that accused Rajesh, Ram Chander Gulia and Pale Ram were the public servants, therefore, the provisions of Section 119 IPC are attracted against them and the provisions of Section 120 IPC are attracted with respect to the other accused persons. Ld. APP argued that the offence punishable u/s 406 IPC was the offence which was designed to be committed. Ld. APP also argued that the accused persons have hatched criminal conspiracy for committing the offence of cheating punishable u/s 420 IPC and the offence of cheating and dishonestly inducing the delivery of property punishable u/s 420 IPC has also been committed.
33. I have gone through the relevant provisions of law and also perused the entire material on record.
34. The money has been recovered from accused Ram Chander Gulia, Rajesh, Rajinder and Pale Ram. As per complaint of Hari Om Rana dated 13.1.2008 there are clear allegations against accused SI Ram Chander Gulia, Pale Ram and J.K. Dahiya. In the complaint of Shri Puran Mal Yadav the clear allegations are there against accused Harsh and Mahender Pal.
Contd.....
FIR No. 7/2008 20 PS EOW/Crime Branch
35. Except for the disclosure statements there is nothing material on record to show that any prima facie charge is made out against the accused persons namely Deepak, Anand, Jagminder, Sanjay Rana, Vicky, Ashok Kumar, Rajnish Yadav, Ashok Saini, Narveer, Umed, Sandeep, Rakesh Kumar, Narender Kumar, Amit Kumar and Zile Singh. The polygraph test report also shows that there is no deception in answering the question put to the accused persons.
36. There is sufficient material on record to show that prima facie charge is made out against accused persons namely Ram Chander Gulia, Pale Ram, Mahender Pal, Joginder Dahiya @ Jocky, Rajesh, Rajender and Harsh Dev.
37. Accordingly, a prima facie charge is made out against accused Ram Chander Gulia, Pale Ram and Rajesh for the offence punishable u/s 420 read with 120B IPC, Section 120B IPC for the criminal conspiracy regarding offence of cheating and dishonestly inducing the delivery of property and for the offence punishable u/s 119 IPC (The offence which was designed to be committed was the criminal breach of trust punishable u/s 406 IPC. It is hereby made clear that the Contd.....
FIR No. 7/2008 21 PS EOW/Crime Branch accused persons are not liable to be charged for the offence punishable u/s 406 IPC in this case, however, Section 119 IPC is to be read in the light of Section 406 IPC in the facts and circumstances of this case).
Further, a prima facie charge is made out against accused Mahender Pal, Joginder Dahiya @ Jocky, Rajinder & Harsh Dev for the offence punishable u/s 420 read with 120B IPC, Section 120B IPC for the criminal conspiracy regarding offence of cheating and dishonestly inducing the delivery of property and for the offence punishable u/s 120 IPC (The offence which was designed to be committed was the criminal breach of trust punishable u/s 406 IPC. It is hereby made clear that the accused persons are not liable to be charged for the offence punishable u/s 406 IPC in this case, however, Section 120 IPC is to be read in the light of Section 406 IPC in the facts and circumstances of this case).
38. In view of the above detailed facts and circumstances and reasons given and observations made, there is nothing material on record to charge the accused persons namely Deepak, Anand, Jagminder, Sanjay Rana, Vicky, Ashok Kumar, Rajnish Yadav, Ashok Saini, Narveer, Umed, Sandeep, Rakesh Kumar, Narender Kumar, Amit Kumar and Zile Singh for any offence as there is only disclosure Contd.....
FIR No. 7/2008 22 PS EOW/Crime Branch statements against them which are insufficient to charge the accused persons. Accordingly, the above named fifteen accused persons are hereby discharged in this case. Ordered accordingly.
39. It is pertinent to mention here that the IO of the present case has utterly failed to take out the Call Detail Report (CDR) of accused Ramesh Dahiya and has also failed to verify and confirm whether infact the paper in question was leaked or not. He also failed to take out the Call Detail Report of the paper setters concerned to analyse the link with the accused persons, if any. On perusal of record it is also found that there are also letters issued from the office of DCP, Recruitment, NPL, Delhi dated 3.6.2009 and addressed to accused persons namely Amit Kumar, Zile Singh, Narender Kumar, Sandeep, Rakesh Kumar, Umed Singh and Narveer in which it is mentioned that in compliance of directions dated 6.4.2009 passed by Hon'ble CAT in OA No. 905/2009, 908/2009, 904/2009, 906/2009, 907/2009, 909/2009, a speaking reply has already been given and, hence, there is no contempt of the order of Hon'ble Court. It is further mentioned in the said letters that the said addressees are not found suitable for the post of Constable (Exe.) Male in Delhi Police and their candidature for the post of Constable (Exe.) Male has been cancelled with immediate effect. There Contd.....
FIR No. 7/2008 23 PS EOW/Crime Branch are also the letters dated 3.2.2011 addressed to the said 7 accused persons and issued from the Office of Commissioner of Police, Delhi in which it is mentioned that aggrieved by the cancellation of your candidature, you filed OA in Hon'ble CAT and Hon'ble Tribunal has passed the order dated 31.5.2010 directing the Commissioner of Police, Delhi to consider your grievances and pass speaking order within 45 days from the receipt of the copy of this order subject to outcome of pending investigation of criminal case FIR No. 07/2008 dated 13.1.2008, u/s 420/120B/34 IPC, PS EOW, New Delhi. According to the said letters, the candidature of the said seven persons was cancelled. It is relevant to note that neither the investigating officer nor the concerned appointing authority has inquired into the involvement, if any, of the persons responsible for setting, publishing question paper and conducting the exam in question.
Passed and announced in the open court today i.e. 09.08.2011.
(MANISH GUPTA) ADDL. CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE (OUTER DISTRICT) ROHINI COURTS, DELHI Contd.....
FIR No. 7/2008 24 PS EOW/Crime Branch Contd.....