Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi
Si Raj Kumar vs Gnct Of Delhi on 24 January, 2011
Central Administrative Tribunal Principal Bench, New Delhi O.A.No.2024/2010 This the 24th day of January 2011 Honble Shri Shailendra Pandey, Member (A) Honble Dr. K.B. Suresh, Member (J) 1. SI Raj Kumar PIS no.16960007 s/o Sh.Gopal Ram r/o 323, Police Colony, Ashok Vihar, Phase-I, Delhi-52, Group C, Aged 43 years. 2. HC Bijender Singh 8849/PCR, PIS no.28800711 s/o Late Sh. Tejpal Singh r/o C-89, East Gokul Pur, Shahdra, Delhi-94. Group C, Aged 49 years. 3. Ct. Rajesh Kumar 3596/PCR, PIS no.28011823 s/o Sh. Chet Ram r/o Village Katopur, Tehsil Kishan Garh, District Alwar, Rajasthan. Group C, Aged 34 years 4. Ct. Raghubir Singh 3594/PCR, PIS no.28862131 s/o Sh. Prahlad Singh r/o Village Phulwari, PO Assawata, Tehsil & District Palwal, Haryana. Group C, Aged 44 years 5. Ct. Dighvijay Singh 3469/PCR, PIS no.28012082 s/o Sh. Sube Singh r/o Village Shahjahna Pur, Tehsil Bahrol, District Alwar, Rajasthan. Group C, Aged 33 years. 6. Ct. Rajender Singh 2590/PCR, PIS no.28010413 s/o Sh. Amar Singh r/o 1135, I Blk., Hari Nagar, Jait Pur, Badarpur, Delhi-44. Group C, Aged 36 years. 7. Ct. Din Dayal 2676/PCR, PIS no.28012134 s/o Sh. Kalu Ram r/o Village Rajpura Jagir, Tehsil Thanagazi, District Alwar, Rajasthan. Group C, Aged 38 years. 8. Ct. Vagta Ram 3525/PCR, PIS no.28880144 s/o Sh. Teja Ram r/o Village & PO Gong, Tehsil Raniwada, District Jalore, Rajasthan. Group C, Aged 41 years 9. Ct. Vishan Pal Singh 3592/PCR, PIS No.28900319 s/o Late Sh. Duli Chand r/o 9, PTS Malviya Nagar, Delhi-17. Group C, Aged 40 years. 10. Ct. Sukhram Pal 3503/PCR, PIS no.28861763 s/o Sh. Zile Singh r/o Village Rajpur Khurd, PO Maidan Garhi, Delhi-68. Group C, Aged 45 years. 11. SI Sher Singh 1398/D, PIS no.28760522, s/o Late Sh. Umrao Singh r/o RZL-98, Vijay Enclave, Palam, Delhi-45. Group C, Aged 56 years (All the Applicants are presently posted in Police Control Room) ..Applicants (By Advocate: Shri Sourabh Ahuja) Versus 1. GNCT of Delhi Through Commissioner of Police Police Head Quarters, I.P. Estate, MSO Building, New Delhi. 2. Additional Commissioner of Police Police Control Room, Delhi Through Commissioner of Police, PHQ, I.P. Estate, MSO Building, New Delhi. 3. Deputy Commissioner of Police Traffic (HQ), Delhi Through Commissioner of Police, PHQ, I.P. Estate, MSO Building, New Delhi. 4. Mr. Dheeraj Kumar, Enquiry Officer, Addl. DCP/PCR, Delhi. Through Commissioner of Police, PHQ, I.P. Estate, MSO Building, New Delhi ..Respondents (By Advocate: Shri Rishi Prakash) O R D E R
Dr. K.B. Suresh, M (J):
The study conducted by the National Crime Records Bureau as well as several Commissions, including the Vohra Committee report, has stipulated that the state of crime, its prevention and control is becoming increasingly difficult due to various reasons and one among them is found within the police force themselves, which are often seen as acting as an agency of criminals themselves. The National Police Academy under the Ministry of Home Affairs had undertaken various studies in this regard and had suggested many improvements in the service pattern and conditions of serving and retired policemen in order to provide for better satisfaction in the force. Though almost all those suggestions were implemented by the Government, experience has taught us that this alone was not sufficient to control the menace of interior deterioration.
2. The method of investigation and control of criminals as provided in the criminal statutes confers the power and a greater amount of secrecy in their working methodologies. Many among them are required also in the Indian social context. But what is important is how to prevent abuse and misuse?
3. The Honble Supreme Court in several cases had occasion to comment upon the whistleblowers and the benefits to the society from their endeavour. Statutory formations following the Apex Courts judgments are on their way, even though not fully satisfactory to contain the social need. It would appear that one such socially induced person or persons found out that at Lajpat Nagar Traffic Circle, the policemen, who were posted in that Circle, were indulging in corrupt practices in an organized manner. He, therefore, possibly, with the help of others also, converted them into digital formats using either a video or still camera, which was later translated into video and CDs. He has placed them before the Lordships at Honble High Court of Delhi, who after hearing and examination, vide an order in a writ petition, directed the police for an enquiry and action. Following the orders of the Honble High Court of Delhi in Chetan Prakash v. State (Writ Petition No.29/2008), a vigilance enquiry was conducted by the vigilance branch of the Delhi Police. Apparently, the enquiry revealed that the police personnel, who were deployed in the Traffic Circle at Lajpat Nagar, were found indulging in corrupt practices. It was clearly visible in the CDs submitted by the complainant, Chetan Prakash before the Honble High Court of Delhi and the police after enquiry found that the zonal officials have failed in the exercise of proper supervision of immediate subordinates and also failed to check the organized corrupt practices. Thereupon, it would appear that a charge sheet was issued to the applicants along with Annexure A-2, summary of allegations, list of witnesses and list of documents.
4. The charge was that while posted in Traffic Circle, Lajpat Nagar, Delhi during the year 2007 they were found indulging in corrupt practices in an organized manner. SI Sher Singh, No.1398/D and SI Raj Kumar, No.D/3720 are involved in two scenes. In pursuance of the Honble High Court of Delhis order in connection with writ-petition No.29/2008, Chetan Prakash V. State, a vigilance enquiry was conducted in Vigilance Branch, Delhi Police. The Vigilance enquiry revealed that the above police personnel who were deployed in Traffic Circle Lajpat Nagar were found indulging in corrupt practices. Their indulgence in corrupt practices is clearly visible in CDs submitted by the complainant Shri Chetan Prakash before the Honble High Court of Delhi in the above mentioned writ petition. The Zonal Officers have failed to exercise proper supervision over their immediate subordinates and also failed to check their organized corrupt practices which adversely affect their integrity. The summary of allegation thereupon holds this conduct as a manner of gross misconduct, lack of integrity, indulgence of corrupt practices and dereliction in the discharge of their official duties which renders them liable to be dealt with departmentally under the provisions of Delhi Police (Punishment & Appeal) Rules, 1980.
5. The applicants have sought the following reliefs on various grounds mentioned at para 5 of the OA, which are discussed hereinafter:
(a) To quash and set aside the impugned orders mentioned in para 1 of the OA and to accord all the consequential benefits to the Applicants viz. promotion, seniority, etc. and
(b) To call for the records of the departmental inquiry qua the Applicants and
(c) To award cost in favour of the Applicants and against the respondents and/or
(d) To pass any further order, which this Honble Tribunal may deem fit, just equitable in the facts and circumstances of the case.
6. The case taken up by the applicants is that basically the allegations are vague and in violation of Rule 16 (1) of the Delhi Police (Punishment & Appeal) Rules, 1980. It was submitted that no particulars or specific role of any of the applicants is mentioned in the alleged misconduct. Thus, they allege that it deprived them a specific opportunity of effectively defending their cause, which goes against the principles of natural justice and is also violative of Article 311 of the Constitution of India. In support of this objection, they have produced a judgment of the Honble High Court of Andhra Pradesh in D.B. Rao & others v. A.P. State Road Transport Corporation Hyderabad & another, 2006 (7) SLR 111 wherein it has been held that common show cause notices issued to several employees which are silent on individual instances of irregularities will be unsustainable, as found in paragraphs 7 & 8 that the enquiry itself revealed that the role of each of the applicants therein were different and non-related to each other. It was found that in a matter relating to unauthorized strike, some were alleged to have committed an offence of refusing to take out the buses but some had taken out the buses but had returned them due to mechanical defects developing in them. It was also found that the notice for a period of less than one week was not properly issued and, therefore, on the twin grounds held that clubbing may not be available, as there is no common methodology available so as to club them together. But when we look at the next page in Annexure A-2 itself, we find the list of witnesses along with the summary of allegations. The list of witnesses is given unlike in regular domestic enquiry but following the pattern of criminal courts where the full list and addresses of the witnesses are given and against them, what exactly they will state in their chief examination, as against the accused, is clearly stated. The witnesses would thus be deposing on aspects of the matter, which were clearly enunciated and which was also video-graphed and video-graph is also available for inspection and comment. The next page of the same Annexure is the list of documents, which provides the copy of the petition No.29 of 2008 and the copy of the statement of all witnesses against them. Therefore, it can be seen that the clubbing together of the incident of the applicants became necessary because they were all common participants with common intention in a single transaction and it cannot be separated from each other without loosing its essential integrity. For the purpose of understanding the essential nature of the charge also, such clubbing together is essential. So far from the point of view of the applicants, the respondents as well as the general public, this clubbing together was necessary and it will not cause any prejudice to the applicants. Therefore, this ground raised by the applicants may not be of any relevance or valid.
7. The second ground raised by the applicants is that an earlier order initiating the departmental enquiry was withdrawn and on the same allegations, a fresh departmental enquiry was ordered on them. The applicants would allege that this has caused serious prejudice to them. It is seen that vide the order dated 15.4.2010, the charges were withdrawn and on 19.5.2010, i.e., after 33 days, the same charges were issued. This, the applicants would say, has violated the rights, which had accrued to them. The respondents, in their reply, resisted on the ground that the earlier departmental enquiry was ordered by the Dy. Commissioner of Police, Traffic (HQ), Delhi vide order No.2375-94/HAP-T(D-I/HQ) dated 20.3.2009 but in the meanwhile the applicants were transferred from the Traffic Unit to the PCR Unit under the disciplinary control of the Additional Commissioner of Police, PCR and hence the earlier officer became powerless and, therefore, vide the order No.3216-25/HAP-T/D-1/HQ dated 15.4.2010, it has been withdrawn and the file was forwarded to the present disciplinary authority, which vide order dated 19.5.2010, ordered the fresh departmental enquiry against the applicants under Rule 15 of CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965 and the rule is not attracted in the facts of the circumstances of the present case. They would also state that reliance on the decision of this Tribunal in OA-602/1999 has no relevance or application but the rules stipulate that on transfer such withdrawal and fresh issuance is permissible. In any case, the applicants have no case that when the matter was withdrawn and re-issued, any promise was made out to them either impliedly or expressly. At the initial stage itself, that order was withdrawn and re-issued based on the said rules. No prejudice, either legally or factually, is caused to the applicants because of such re-issue. Therefore, the grounds raised in this regard may not have any validity.
8. The applicants have a case that a copy of the vigilance enquiry report was not supplied to them. They would say that non-supply of the vigilance enquiry report has prejudiced them but it is seen from the concerned order that the vigilance enquiry was an internal fact finding enquiry while the charges are based on the witnesses statements and documentation.
9. The applicants have filed a rejoinder in which they have alleged that the report of the Forensic Science Laboratory (FSL) on the CDs submitted by Chetan Prakash has come out and it was opined that the said CDs were tailored to suit a particular purpose. Normally, the FSL reports are not made available to the outsiders but in this case, it is surprising, how the applicants could obtain them? Therefore, it deserves an enquiry in itself. For this reason, we have been compelled to look into the report of the FSL. The result of the examination is that one out of 46 video clips consists of a few frames (less than one second play time) from the video clip present in the memory card. It is also mentioned that the some portion of the video footage of video clips as available in memory card is omitted in the all 46 video clips available in the DVC. On these grounds, it is seen that the FSL seems to have made an observation that the video footings recorded in the DVCs are tailored one. Therefore, let us examine, in public interest, what could have been recorded in a memory card and that video clipping. We are not aware what type of camera was used to take the images in question. The recordings in the video was obviously transferred to the video CDs. Therefore, at the most, what could be said was that there was editing out and not editing in. The question for determination arises only if there is editing in so as to bring the extraneous images into the matter. There is no allegation that anything beyond common stream of images are seen and recorded. Therefore, this fact in the report of Dr. Vishwas Bhardwaj, SSO (Physics), FSL must come to the focus of attention of the police authorities, as we feel that by deliberating on an alleged inclusion and extraneous factor is seen and an unfortunate observation is made probably with a view to create a cloud of suspicion over the recordings, which even normally, technically competent persons cannot conceive of.
10. Even if the applicants allegations is that there is editing out, some of the memory cards having the memory of video clippings may not contain those images but it is open to them to challenge the maker of such imagery and find out by substantial examination whether any inclusion had been made. But at present, the applicants have no complaint that extraneous matter prejudicial to them has been brought in. In this conspectus, let us find out what might have been the imagery recorded by the digital application. For an authority to take umbrage at their activity, it can only be the recording of corrupt practices and by editing out. If at all it occurred, it can be that some culprits may escape but by editing in, it can be said that the persons, who have not done anything, may be brought into the picture but then other factors, like place of posting, allotment of duties and time of duties are available to counter such allegations. Besides, even though versed in a vague term, what is mentioned by the Scientist is only that the whole of information in memory card does not transform into the video clips, which may have been made later on. That will not, in any way, take away the integrity of the imagery, nor the integrity of the maker of the document. We leave it to the Commissioner of Police, Delhi, who is respondent before us, to look into this matter afresh and do whatever is required in this as an expert, when he gives an information, is bound to opine only on issues involved in it and not to create dissentions in it.
11. The negativity in the National Crime Records Bureau studies, the media reports and the general feeling of insecurity of people of Delhi stems from a great part from the activity and inactivity of the Delhi Police. The Honble High Court of Delhi having been convinced that a serious infraction has taken place directed an enquiry to be initiated. When the highest judicial forum has directed to initiate the enquiry, it binds the concerned authority to conduct the enquiry with utmost sincerity and dedication to the cause. The life of people of Delhi must be protected in the hands of the Delhi Police. Protection does not mean fleecing the people. If the policemen engaged in corrupt practices, which are recorded in digital application, it is trite, they must be brought to book.
12. May be because of common cause enjoyed by the people in the force, at least some persons in the Department, might feel compelled or impelled to act in this, and this may also result in technical glitches coming into being with alarming regularity but the basic fact remains that in normal case is that the digital imagery is not found to be corrupt unless contradicted by sufficient evidences and examination. Such opportunities are available to the applicants in the course of departmental enquiry. To make the enquiry more transparent and purposeful, therefore, it might be worthwhile for the authorities to conduct the enquiry against the applicants within a time frame and on a day-to-day basis, so that no innocent needs be under cloud unduly long. The truth must come out. It must prevail at all costs. We accordingly direct the respondents to commence the enquiry within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and complete it on day-to-day basis within next one month and within 10 days of the completion of the enquiry, serve a copy of the enquiry report on each of the applicants and the disciplinary authority, after hearing them on the report, shall pass appropriate orders within three months next of receiving a copy of this order.
13. OA lacks merits and is accordingly dismissed without any order as to costs.
( Dr. K.B. Suresh ) ( Shailendra Pandey ) Member (J) Member (A) /sunil/