Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi
Hon Ble Mr. G. George Paracken vs Commissioner Of Police on 4 July, 2011
Central Administrative Tribunal Principal Bench OA-2012/2010 New Delhi this 4th day of July, 2011 Honble Mr. G. George Paracken, Member (J) Honble Dr. Veena Chhotray, Member (A) Surjeet Singh S/o Sh. Jaswant Singh R/o B 43 Type II P.S. Bhajan Pura, Delhi-53. .. Applicant.
(By Advocate: Shri Ajesh Luthra) Versus Commissioner of Police PHQ, MSO Building, IP Estate, New Delhi.
2. Special Commissioner of Police (Armed Police) Police Headquarters, I.P. Estate, New Delhi.
3. Deputy Commissioner of Police IIIrd Bn DAP, Vikas Puri Lines, Delhi. . Respondents.
(By Advocate: Mrs. P.K. Gupta) Order Shri G.George Paracken.
The Applicant is aggrieved by the Annexure A-3 Enquiry Officers Report dated 01.10.2009, Annexure A-2 by the disciplinary authoritys order dated 15.12.2004 imposing upon him penalty of dismissal from service and Annexure A-1 order of the Appellate Authority dated 19.4.2010, rejecting his appeal.
2. The Charge against the applicant was under:-
It is alleged against H.C. Surjeet Singh, No. 2042/DAP (PIS No. 28820471) that on 1.05.09 he was deployed on duty as I/C Jail Van on jail lotus-5 and had taken 10+2 SAG UTPs to Tis Hazari Lock up in the morning. He arrived at Tis Hazari Lock-up at around 9.00 am vide DD No. 8-B, OD Lock-up Tis Hazari court. But in the afternoon after the departure of Lotus-4 from Tis Hazari lock-up, H.C. Surjeet Singh, No. 2042/DAP I/C Jail Van, Lotus-5 was found missing and could not be traced after searching all around Tis Hazari Court Complex. The HC was carrying with him Arms/Ammunition and wireless set issued from Kot/wireless store Vikas Puri Lines. After a frantic search he could not be traced hence he was marked absent vide DD No. 23-B dated 01.05.2009, OD lock-up, Tis Hazari court. Later on, the HC was found moving in Vikas Puri Police complex, under the influence of Alcohol. He was got medically examined at DDU Hospital by SI Kadam Singh where the doctor opined to be having Smell of Alcohol (+), conscious oriented vide MLC No. 8304/09, dated 01.05.2009. As such the HC has committed a serious misconduct by absenting himself from Duty with Govt. Arms, Ammunitions and wireless set and had consumed liquor during duty hours.
The above act of omission and commission on the part of H.C. Surjeet Singh, No. 2042/DAP (PIS No. 28820471) amounts to grave misconduct, negligence, carelessness, unbecoming of a police officer ad also9 dereliction in the discharge of his official duties, which renders him liable for departmental action under the provisions of Delhi Police (Punishment and Appeal) Rules, 1980.
3. After a detailed enquiry in the matter the Inquiry Officer came to the conclusion that the aforesaid charge against the applicant has been proved and the relevant part of the report dated 01.10.2009 is extracted as under:-
The main allegation in the charge is that on 1.5.2009 H.C. Surjeet Singh, No. 2042/DAP was deployed on duty as I/C Jail Van on Jail Van Lotus-5 and had taken 10+2 SAG UTPs to Tis Hazari Lock-up in the morning. He arrived at the lock-up at around 9.00 am vide DD No. 8-B, OD Lock-up, Tis Hazari court. But in the after noon after the departure of Lotus -4 Jail Van from Tis Hazari Court, H.C. Surjeet Singh, No. 2042/DAP was found missing and could not be traced after searching all around Tis Hazari Court Complex. The HC was carrying with him Arms/Ammunition and wireless set issued from Kot/wireless store, Vikas Puri Lines. After a frantic search he could not be traced hence he was marked absent vide DD No. 23-B dated 1.5.09, OD Lock-up, Tis Hazari Court. Later on, the HC was found moving in Vikas Puri Police complex under the influence of Alcohol. He was got medically examined at DDU Hospital by SI Kadam Singh where the Doctor opinion to be having Smell of Alcohol (+) BAC 42.7mg/100ml, conscious oriented vide MLC No. 8304/09, dated 01.05.2009.
In support of the allegations, 8 PWs have been examined. PW-1, SI Kadam Singh No. 874/D, 3rd DAP got the HC medically examined on the directions of senior officers at DDU Hospital vide MLC No. 8304/09, Ex-PW-1/C. He also produced copies of DD No. 65-B and 68-B dated 01.05.2009 which are Ex-PW-1/A and PW-1/B respectively and on return from Hospital he brought all the facts in the knowledge of RI/3rd Bn telephonically. PW-2, Const. Subhash Chand produced original Kot Reister and as this register H.C. Surjeet Singh, No. 2042/DAP who was deployed on duty with van No. 18, was issued one Pistol No. 5765 and 10 live cartridges. At around 7.00 pm HC deposited back both the items issued to him in Kot and the same were in proper order. He also produced photocopy of this register which is Ex-PW-2/A. PW-3 HC Anil Kumar No. 7284/DAP produced copies of DD No. 8-B and 23-B dated 01.5.09 OD Lock-up. Tis Hazari Court and proved that on that day HC Surjeet Singh No.2041/DAP arrived at OD lock up and had brought 10+2 SAG UTPs from Central Jail in jail Van No.Lotus -5(DL-IP B-9113) at around 9.00 am vide DD No.8-B. At around 3.50 p.m. after the departure of Lotus-4 Jail Van HC Surjeet Singh, I/C Jail, Van, Lotus-5 was searched at OD lock up but he was found missing from there, hence he was found missing from there hence he was marked absent vide DD ,23-B OD lock up dated 01.5.09 mentioning all the circumstances. Both these entries are marked Ex-PW-3/A&B respectively. All these facts were also brought in the knowledge of Enabling the respondents to file their reply, case is adjourned to. Reply be filed two days before the next date fixed with an advance copy to the counsel opposite./3rd Bn by1/C OD Lock-up on telephone and the jail van was departed without 1/c with 21 UTPs to Central Jail. PW-4, HC Karan Singh No.7169/DAP, 1/C wireless store vikas Puri Lines produced orginal wireless store register dated 01.5.09 nd as per this register wireless set no.1283 along with two gas cells was issued to HC Surjeet Singh 2042/DAP 1/C jail van, Lotus-5 on 01.5.09. In the evening, HC Surjit Singh deposited back both these items in store in proper order. He also produced photocopy of this register which is ExPW4/A/ PW-5 Const. Selak Ram 2559/DP, Munshi WZ Coy, 3rd Bn DAP, produced copy of Command Certificate No.49995/Enabling the respondents to file their reply, case is adjourned to. Reply be filed two days before the next date fixed with an advance copy to the counsel opposite./3rd Bn dated 1.5.09 and stated that as per this command certificate, HC Surjeet Singh No.2042/DAP was deployed as 1/C Jail Van along with const. Sudhir No.7509/DAP, Const. Chander Pal No.2395/DAP and Const.Rajpal No.2449/DAP on van No.18. Coy only preprepare command certificate and handed over the same to BHM staff who allot them the Jain van. He also produced photocy of this command certificate and the same is Ex-PW-5/A. pW-6 Const.Rajesh Kumar No.2249/DAP Munshi MHC. 3rd Bn DAP produced original DD No.8-A dated 01.5.09 Vikas Puri Lines and as per this DD entry HC Surjeet SinghNo.2042/DAP who was deployed as 1/C guard on Jain Van OD-5(91103) was got lodged by Const.Sudhir No.7509/DAP, as HC Surjeet Singh, 1/C Jail Van was not with them. PW-7 Dr.ankur Ori, JRO, DDU Hospital, has stated that on 01.5.09 he examined HC Surjeet Singh s/o Jaswat Sngh vide MLC No.8304/09 and E.No.68576 and on examination he opined smell of Alcohol(+) BAC 42.7mg/100ml as HC Surjeet has consumed alcohol and no visible external injury was present on his body, he was conscious, oriented and his pulse rate and BP were normal. He recorded all these things in the MLC which iEx-PW-1/C. PW-8 Insp.Sarabjeet Singh Enabling the respondents to file their reply, case is adjourned to. Reply be filed two days before the next date fixed with an advance copy to the counsel opposite./3rd Bn DAP, stated that on 01.5.09 HC Surjeet Sngh 2042/DAPwas deployed as 1/CJain Van, Lotur-5 and he departed to OD Lock-up along with 10+2 SAG UTPs. At around 4.30 p.m. 1/C OD Lock-up Shri Baljeet Singh informed him on telephone that HC Surjeet Singh No.2042/DAP who was deployed as 1/C Jain Van, Lotus-5 is missing from OD Lock-up. He Surjeet Singh No.2042/DAP was also having Arms/Ammunitions and wireless set with him. Hece, he was marked absent vide DD No.23-B dated 01.5.09 at OD Lock-up. At around 6.00 pm HC Surjeet Singh No.2042/DAP was found roaming in Vikas Puri Police Complex in drunken state. He was got medically examined through SI Kadam Singh from DDU Hospital by the orders of senior officers vide MLC No.8304/09 and the Doctor who examined him opined Smell of Alcohol(+) conscious oriented. In these circumstances he prepared a report and send the same to senior officers. Copy of the same is Ex-PW-8/A. All the above discussion shows that all the PWs have supported the allegations in connection with deployment of HC Surjeet Singh No.2042/DAP as 1/C Jail Van Lotus-5, his absence from OD Lock up with Govt. Arms/Ammunitions, and wireless set and consumption of Alcohol while on duty. He produced only one defence witness who stated that he prescribed him some medicines as he was having cough and cold but he could not produce any record for the same. Further more the defaulter did not submit his written defence statement though he was given lot of opportunities and time to submit the same which shows that he nothing to say in his defence.
Conclusion:-
In the light of the above discussion the charge against HC Surjeet Singh No.2042/DAP, that on 01.5.09 when he was deployed as 1/C Jail Van Lotus-5 was found missing along with Arms/Ammunitions and wireless set from OD Lock-up and there was no response on wireless set from him and he could not be traced and his consumption of Alcohol while on duty stands fully proved beyond any shadow of doubt.
4. The disciplinary authority vide U.O. No.15.10.2009, gave an opportunity to the applicant to represent against the aforesaid enquiry report. The applicant submitted his Annexure A-5 representation dated 11.11.2009 and his contention were as under:-
By summing up the evidence of PWs & DW, the following facts have come on record which are quite sufficient to prove that I am innocent in this case and the Enquiry Officer proved the charge against me illegally, which is against the principles of natural justice:-
That there is no evidence on record to prove the charge against me & the EO irroneously came to his conclusion on the basis of presumptions, conjuctions & surmises presumptions can not take the place of proof. None of PWs examined during the course of DE proceedings dedefrosed that I had consumed alcohol.
That PS I on cross examination categorically admitted that I was not under the influence of liquor while taking for medical examination at DDU Hospital. This shows that this part of charge for consuming liquor is baseless & false.
That all other PWs are formal witness and they also produced the official record & did not speak even a single word against me. In case I was under the influence of liquor PWs 2 & 4 who deposited the arms/ammunities & wireless set etc., would have certainly deposed against me about these allegations.
That the medical officer of DDU Hospital on cross examination stated that he can/t tell whether I was under the influence of liquor or not. It is surprising that the medical officer who conducted my medical examination was not aware about consuming liquor. He only stated smell of alcohol, otherwise all other things were normal. He also not reported about my behaviour etc. instead he stated that I was not violent at the time of medical examination. This shows that I have been made a scap-goal for the misconduct which I had never committed. That the enquiry officer had not given due consideration to the evidence of my defence witness, who is a registered medical practitioner. The evidence of this DW is trust worthy & could not be ignored. He clearly stated that on 30.4.1009 I was suffering from cough & Cold & he advised me to take Phencydyl Syrup which contains some alcohol. On that very day I had taken the medicines as prescribed the doctor & I became sleepy. I was not aware about my actions and in the evening when I feel some relief, I deposited the articles in the respective store of Vikas Puri, Police Line. These all facts shows that I am innocent in the whole episode and the enquiry officer illegally proved the charge at his own presumptions and surmises, which is against the principals of natural justice.
That the Principal Bench of Honble CAT in case of Manjeet Singh V/s. UOI Regd. No. T-298/1986 decided on 31.1.88 passed directions that there is no prohibiton of the area, the consumption of alcohol does not itself constitute an offence under this law. In view of these directions, I had not committee any offence and the charge proved by the E.O. is not legal in the interest of natural justice.
5. Therefore, the Disciplinary Authority vide its Annexure A-2 Order dated 15.12.2009 imposed the punishment of dismissal from service upon the Applicant and the relevant part of the said order reads as under:-
I have carefully gone through the findings of the E.O. and other relevant records available on D.E. file. The defaulter H.C. Surjeet Singh, No. 2042/DAP was also heard in O.R. on 27.11.2009 where he pleaded the same thing as he narrated in his written representation against the findings of the E.O. Incharge of a Jail Van is responsible for guards and UTPs boarded in the Van and to thwart any untoward incident during the production duty of UTPs in various Courts and to ensure safe deposition of these UTPs back to the jail, in which the defaulter H.C. Surjeet Singh, No. 2042/DAP had totally failed. During production duty, which is most sensitive and vulnerable duty, he consumed alcohol and absented himself from duties alongwith Govt. Arms, Ammunition and Wireless Set, which is a serious lapse on his part. It might be hazardous to the safe depositions of the UTPs, as in the absence of Incharge, the other guard staff might have faced difficulties in case any untoward incident took place during the production duty. This act on the part of defaulter H.C. Surjeet Singh, No. 2040/DAP is perfidy with the disciplined force like Delhi Police. In view of current security scenario of the country, a police cop is needed to be utmost vigilant in the performance of his duties, in which the defaulter H.C. Surjeet Singh, No. 2042/DAP has failed. The above act committed by the defaulter H.C. Surjeet Singh, No. 2042/DAP has tarnished the image of the department before the eyes of general public. He deserved to be given severest punishment which may teach a lesson to the other staff and they may dare not to do such grave misconduct. He is found unfit to be retained in the Delhi Police Department. Hence, I, R.N. Meena, Dy. Commissioner of Police, III Bn. DAP, Delhi, is inclined to impose the penalty of dismissal from service and accordingly hereby order to dismiss the defaulter H.C. Surjeet Singh, No. 2042/DAP from service with immediate effect.
6. The Applicant filed the Annexure A-6 appeal dated nil against the aforesaid order of the Disciplinary Authority and the relevant part of the same is under:-
By summing up the evidence of PWs & DW, the following facts have come on record which are quite sufficient to prove that I am innocent in this case and the Enquiry Officer proved the charge against me illegally, which is against the principles of natural justice:-
That there is no evidence on record to prove the charge against me & the EO irroneously came to his conclusion on the basis of presumptions, conjuctions & surmises presumptions can not take the place of proof. None of PWs examined during the course of DE proceedings dedefrosed that I had consumed alcohol.
That PS I on cross examination categorically admitted that I was not under the influence of liquor while taking for medical examination at DDU Hospital. This shows that this part of charge for consuming liquor is baseless & false.
That all other PWs are formal witness and they also produced the official record & did not speak even a single word against me. In case I was under the influence of liquor PWs 2 & 4 who deposited the arms/ammunities & wireless set etc., would have certainly deposed against me about these allegations.
(iv) That the medical officer of DDU Hospital on cross examination stated that he can/t tell whether I was under the influence of liquor or not. It is surprising that the medical officer who conducted my medical examination was not aware about consuming liquor. He only stated smell of alcohol, otherwise all other things were normal. He also not reported about my behaviour etc. instead he stated that I was not violent at the time of medical examination. This shows that I have been made a scap-goal for the misconduct which I had never committed. That the enquiry officer had not given due consideration to the evidence of my defence witness, who is a registered medical practitioner. The evidence of this DW is trust worthy & could not be ignored. He clearly stated that on 30.4.1009 I was suffering from cough & Cold & he advised me to take Phencydyl Syrup which contains some alcohol. On that very day I had taken the medicines as prescribed the doctor & I became sleepy. I was not aware about my actions and in the evening when I feel some relief, I deposited the articles in the respective store of Vikas Puri, Police Line. These all facts shows that I am innocent in the whole episode and the enquiry officer illegally proved the charge at his own presumptions and surmises, which is against the principals of natural justice.
(vi) That the Principal Bench of Honble CAT in case of Manjeet Singh V/s. UOI Regd. No. T-298/1986 decided on 31.1.88 passed directions that there is no prohibiton of the area, the consumption of alcohol does not itself constitute an offence under this law. In view of these directions, I had not committee any offence and the charge proved by the E.O. is not legal in the interest of natural justice.
7. The Appellate Authority considered the Applicants aforesaid Annexure A-6 appeal but rejected the same vide the Annexure A-1 order dated 19.4.2010 the relevant part is as under:-
The applicant in his appeal has mainly pleaded that (i) he left for Tis Hazari Lock up alongwith 10+2 SAG UTPs as usual and deposited them in the Kharza lock up. At about 4 PM Lotus-4 Jail Van left the lock-up and the next Jail Van started loading in his presence. As he was suffering from cold and cough for the last two days, suddenly there was a severe pain in his stomach, so he went the 1st Floor lavatory block to ease himself. However, when he came at the lock-up, the Jil Van had left Tis Hazari. Therefore, he reached Vikas Puri Lines trough TSR. He was marked absent at 4.45 PM vide DD No. 23B dated 01.05.2009 at O.D. Lock-up, Tis Hazari and he was seen in Vikas Puri Lines at 6 PM, which proved that the absence of the appellant was merely for one hour and 15 minutes with no loss to any govt. property, (ii) there is no such evidence on the DE file to prove that the speech of the appellant was incoherent and the gait was also abnormal. PW-1 SI Kadam Singh also confirmed that the behaviour of the appellant was quite normal when the appellant was taken for medical examination, (iii) none of the PW deposed that the appellant had consumed liquor or saw him consuming liquor on duty. Only a smell from the mouth was not sure test for alcohol consumption by him. Blood test was not done, (iv) DW-1 Dr. Hari Om Sharma, RMP proved that he prescribed medicine for cold and cough, which could give +ve smell of alcohol on being consumed. The appellant also produced the prescription slip but the disciplinary authority had not taken into consideration, (v) during the DE proceedings, none of the PW stated that the appellant was searched in the lavatory block on the first floor, (vi) the disciplinary authority has passed punishment order on the basis of extraneous material. The punishment awarded to him is harsh and disproportionate because the absence was only for 1 hour and 15 minutes which was beyond his control and he had not consumed liquor during duty hour as alleged.
I have carefully gone through the appeal, impugned order dated 15.12.2009 and all the relevant material on record. The appellant was deployed on duty as I/C Jail Van on Lotus-5 and took 10+2 SAG UTPs to Tis Hazari Lock-up in the morning of 01.05.09. But in the afternoon, after the departure of Lotus-4 from Tis Hazari Lock-up, the appellant was found missing. The appellant was having Arms, Ammunition and Wireless Set. He was searched all around Tis Hazari Court Complex but could not be traced. Therefore, he was marked absent vide DD No. 23-B dated 01.05.09, O.D. Lock-up, Tis Hazari, Delhi. Later on, he was found moving in Vikas Puri Police Complex under the influence of Alcohol. He was medically examined at DDU Hospital by SI Kadam Singh, where doctor opined Smell of Alcohol (+) conscious and oriented vide MLC No. 8304 dated 01.05.09. As such the appellant had committed a serious is conduct by absenting himself from duty with govt. Arms, Ammunition and Wireless Set and had consumed liquor during duty hours. In charge of a Jail Val is responsible for guards and UTPs boarded in the Van and to thwart any untoward incident during the production duty of UTPs in various Courts and to ensure safe deposition of these UTPs back to the Jail, in which the appellant had totally failed. There was no reason to disbelieve the report of a doctor. The E.O. proved the charge on the basis of documentary evidence adduced during the DE proceedings. The EO has given due consideration of the appellants defence statement while submitting the findings. The disciplinary authority has decided the DE and passed final orders after going through evidence on record, which is fair and justified.
I have also heard the appellant in O.R. on 16.04.2010. During O.R., he could not come out with anything fresh, requested for mercy and cried about his precarious financial condition and domestic problems. The charge leveled against the appellant was proved during the DE proceedings. I find that he was not sincere in performing his official duties. Keeping in view the facts of the case and the material available on file, I see no reason to interfere with the orders of the disciplinary authority. Hence, the appeal is rejected.
8. The Applicant challenged the aforesaid impugned orders and prayed for quashing and setting aside them with all consequential benefits on the very same grounds which he has taken before the Inquiry Officer, Disciplinary Authority and the Appellate Authority during the enquiry proceedings.
9. The learned counsel for the applicant Shri Ajesh Luthra has submitted that admittedly, the absence of the applicant was only for 1 hour and 15 minutes and the reason for the same was that he was suffering from cold and cough on the date of incident and he had gone to the lavatory in the first floor of the Tis Hazari Court to ease himself as he had severe stomach pain and he had explained the position before the inquiry officer and the disciplinary authority. Thereafter, he on his own, has reached Vikas Puri at 6.00 p.m. by traveling by TSR. He has also submitted that his A-5 representation against the order of punishment has not been considered at all by the disciplinary authority. Further he has submitted that the findings of inquiry officer, there is no response on wireless was an extraneous matter and it was not a part of the charge. Further, neither the Enquiry Officer nor the Disciplinary Authority or Appellate Authority has given due consideration to the submission of the defence witness who was an RMP Doctor that the applicant has been suffering from cough and cold he had gone to his clinic for treatment and after examining him, he prescribed (i) Tab.Avil- 25mg,(ii) Novamox- 500 mg. and (iii) Phensedryl syrup as the medicine for three days for the aforesaid ailments. He has also deposed that after taking Avil, one would feel sleepy and Phensedryl syrup smells like alcohol as it contain alcohol. The learned counsel further submitted that it is on record of the enquiry officer that PW-8 admitted that the applicant had reached Vikas Puri at 6.00 p.m. Learned counsel for the Applicant has also submitted that the Disciplinary Authority did not consider the Applicants Annexure A-5 representation dated 11.11.2009 wherein actual facts have been explained. He further submitted that the disciplinary authority has not found any misconduct on the part of the Applicant but still he imposed the penalty without any application of mind. He has also stated that the Appellate Authority, instead of taking a decision on merits, adopted a sort cut method by stating in his order that the Applicant has request for mercy and cried about his precarious condition and domestic problems whereas he never requested for any mercy.
10. The respondents counsel, Ms.P.K.Gupta has submitted that all the aforesaid contentions of the applicant are wrong. She has submitted that (i) Applicant was found missing and could not be traced after searching all around Tis Hazari Court Complex and he was marked absence vide DD No.23-B dated 01.5.2009, (ii) He was carrying with him Arms/Ammunition and wireless set issued from Kot/wireless store Vikas Puri (iii) Later, he was found moving in Vlikas Puri Police Complex under the influence of alcohol and (iv) he was medically examined and the doctor vide MLC No.8304/09, dated 01.05.2009 opined that he was smelling of alcohol but he was conscious and oriented.
11. We have considered the aforesaid submissions of the counsel for the applicant as well as the Respondent. Applicant was a Head Constable in Delhi Police and was entrusted with a very important and highly sensitive work. He was in charge of the Jail Van carrying the under trials to the Tis Hazari Court. He was also armed and carrying a wireless set. Therefore, he is not expected to be away from his duty place without proper prior permission of his Superior Officer or at least with information of his colleagues on duty. Therefore, his explanations that he was suffering from stomach achae and he was in lavatory and he was smelling alcohol because he had taken phensedryl containing alcohol are of no relevance. Therefore, his misconduct of absenting himself from duty with government arms, ammunitions and wireless cannot be condoned.
12. In view of the above facts and circumstances of this case, we dismiss this OA. There is no order as to costs.
(Dr.Veena Chhotray ) (G.George Paracken)
Member(A) Member(J)
/rb/
Item-25
01.6.2011
OA-2012/2010
Present: Shri Ajesh Luthra, counsel for the applicant.
Ms. P.K. Gupta, counsel for the respondents.
Heard counsel for the parties. Order reserved.
(Dr.Veena Chhotray ) (G.George Paracken)
Member(A) Member(J)
rb
Page-17
. The other members of the jail van Guard were not with him. When asked about the other members of the guard, he told that he is not aware of them and they may have come in some other jail van as he wasnot with them. After checking of the Arms/Ammunitio the same were deposited back in the Kot.
Page- 19 . He was medically examined by him vide MLC No. 8304/09 which is already Ex.PW-1/C and E. No. 68576 and bears his signature.
.. There was also no communication with H.C. Surjeet Singh on his wireless set, hence he was marked absent vide DD No. 23-B at OD Lock-up. At around 6.00 pm H.C. Surjeet Singh was found roaming in Vikas Puri Lines under the influence of liquor. In these circumstances by the orders of senior officers he was sent to DDU Hospital for medical examination. Doctor on duty examined him vide MLC No. 8304/09 and opined Smell of Alcohol (+), conscious oriented.
Page-20 He stated that he a RMP Doctor and is running a clinic at A-2/423, J.J. Colony Bhalaswa Jahangir Puri in the name of Sharma Clinic. On 30.4.09 H.C. Surjeet Singh who was suffering from cough and cold came to his clinic for treatment. After examining him, he advised and prescribed him (i) Tab. Avil-25mg, (ii) Novamox 500mg and (iii) Phancydyl Syrup for three days. After taking Tab. Avil 25mg one feel sleepy and phancedyl syrup gives smell like alcohol as it contains alcohol.
Page-21