Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

As has been captioned in the counter reply under the head  brief facts of the case a joint departmental enquiry was initiated against the applicant and Constable Ajay Kumar, 3100/DAP vide order No.XVI/287/07/11580-11594/HAP/T (D-1) (NDR) dated 10.09.2007 for his alleged misdemeanor of indulging in malpractices of demanding and accepting Rs.200/- illegally in the form of entry money from the owner of vehicle number Dl-IV-7941.

2. On 18.07.2007, a team comprising of Inspector Dinesh Keshav TI/ PRG, Inspector Hanuman Dan, SI Shailendra Singh and SI Pankaj Malik of PRG Cell was formed on the direction of ACP/T-PRG. The PRG team started moving in a private car arranged by Inspector Dinesh Keshav, TI/PRG, in North-East-District and checked the traffic staff at various points. At about 10.45AM, the team reached near eastern side of old iron bridge in Shahdara Traffic Circle and observed that the RTV bearing registration number DL-IV-7941 (ibid) was parked on the left side of GT road after crossing the bridge on the carriage way going towards Shahdara and one head constable along with two constables present at the eastern end of old iron bridge were negotiating something with a person, presumably the driver of the RTV. The PRG team positioned itself outside Shastri Park Metro Station parking at some distance ahead of the above RTV and started watching the activities of traffic staff. After some time, the driver of the above RTV was let off by the traffic staff. The PRG team followed the RTV, which turned left towards Shastri Park and intercepted it at the Red light signal, Shastri park. Enquiry was made from its driver who revealed his name as Ram Bilas. On enquiry, the driver confided that the staff stationed at iron bridge had asked him to pay Rs.1000/- as entry money for the month but he told them that the same would be paid by the RTV owner Gajender Singh. The driver was advised by the PRG team to call his owner and meet PRG outside Shastri Park Metro Station. At about 11.15AM, a motorcycle came and its rider approached PRG team and introduced himself as Gajender Singh, owner of the RTV number DL-IV-7941. According to his driver, the traffic staff deployed at eastern side of old iron bridge had asked for Rs.1000/- as entry money. The PRG team asked the owner of the RTV to ply the RTV normally and if the same was stopped by the traffic staff and entry money was demanded again, he should negotiate and pay it. Accordingly, the RTV plied from Yamuna bazaar towards Shahdara on old iron bridge and PRG team followed the same. It was again stopped by the traffic staff deployed at the road side immediately after coming out of the eastern edge of old iron bridge at about 12.45 PM. The PRG team positioned itself on GT road near the fruit vendor at about a distance of 100 meters ahead of the place where the RTV was stopped by traffic staff and started watching the activities of traffic staff. They could observe that both the constables deployed at the point, in the presence of Head Constable, started negotiation with Gajender Singh, the owner of RTV. After some time, one of the constables moved away and the other constable continued talking to Shri Gajender. Ultimately Shri Gajender took out something from his shirt pocket and handed over the same to constable talking to him and returned to his RTV and resumed onward journey. The RTV was intercepted underneath the metro bridge on GT road and enquiry was made from Gajender Singh. Mr. Gajender Singh informed the PRG team that he was the owner of RTV No.DL-IV-7941 and was plying his RTV on route No.F-250 from Loni No. 2 to Jheel via Pushta Shastri Park and whenever needed, he himself also used to drive the RTV. He could reveal that the two constables who signaled to stop RTV were Sunil Kumar (Applicant) and Ajay Sharma. Ajay Sharma asked him about the entry money and said that it was 18th of the month and money had not been paid. Ajay Sharma demanded Rs.1000/- as entry money and said that anything less than that would not be accepted. After negotiations, Ct. Ajay Sharma agreed to accept a sum of Rs.500/- and asked Ct. Sunil (applicant) to collect the same and went away to one side. According to Shri Gajender Singh, he requested the applicant to accept Rs.200/- only at the moment and gave an assurance to pay the remaining amount later on. He finally gave two notes of Rs.100/- denomination each (total Rs.200/-) to Ct.Sunil (applicant) and returned to his RTV. Shri Gajinder Singh, owner of the vehicle was brought back at the spot where Rs.200/- was taken from him as entry money. Seeing the PRG team coming towards them alongwith the owner of RTV, the applicant fled away from the spot on a silver colour M/cycle towards Gandhi Nagar even taking wrong side of the road. The other constable Ajay Sharma was identified by Mr. Gajender Singh, the Constable who had first demanded Rs.1000/- from him and later asked to Constable Sunil to accept Rs.500/-. The owner of the vehicle also identified HC Iqbal Hussain who was standing under the bridge at the time when the constables Ajay and Sunil had demanded entry money of Rs.1000/- and accepted Rs.200/- from him. The PRG team enquired about the name and numbers of the constables from the Head Constable who revealed their names as Ct.Sunil Kumar (applicant) and Ct. Ajay Sharma, No.3369/T.

13. Now we may proceed to see whether there is incriminating material against the applicant sufficient enough to find the charges against him as proved. HC Rajpal Singh examined as PW-1 in the enquiry proceeding deposed that on 18.07.2007, Constable Sunil No.1658/T was on duty at iron bridge (Lohai ka pul), Shahdara. PW-2 supported the charges and specifically stated that PW-5, Gajender Singh took out some papers appearing like currency notes from his pocket and handed over to one of the two constables. In his cross examination in answer to question No.14, he confirmed the aforementioned step. PW-4 also specifically deposed during the enquiry that Gajender Singh, owner of RTV informed the PRG team that the traffic staff demanded Rs.1000/- from his driver and he could witness the spotting of RTV by the traffic staff. The said witness could also confirm that owner of RTV informed that traffic staff demanded Rs.1000/-, the amount was negotiated as Rs.500 and finally Rs.200 was paid to the traffic staff. PW-5 resiled from his earlier statement and gave a different version. HC Iqbal Hussan, though examine as DW, confirmed the fact that on 18.07.2007, he was on duty at Old Yamuna bridge (lohai ka pul) between 8AM morning to 9.00PM along with the applicant and Constable Ajay Kumar. The DW-2 narrated that on 18.07.2007 at about 12/12.30, he was going to take petrol for Government vehicle and when reached at old Yamuna bridge ( lohai ka pul), he met Ajay and on his request went to Metro Station to take tea. Even the said DW also confirmed the fact of duty of the applicant at the spot. From the statement of witnesses, it is factually established that the applicant was on duty at the spot mentioned in the charge sheet. PWs 2 and 4 supported the charges. PW 5 also did not deny his meeting with PRG team. There is no explanation of the fact either by the said PW or by the applicant that why the said witness could not report the interception by the PRG team to the superior authorities. In the discussion of evidence by the enquiry officer, he could conclude that PWs 2 and 4 supported the charge and PW 1 and 3 authenticated the posting of both the constables in traffic unit near iron bridge Shahdara. It is the finding of enquiry officer that DW-1 to 4 did not support the charge. Of course, such finding of the enquiry officer is absurd. Defence witnesses led by the applicant were examined not to support the charge but to support the defence of the applicant. Nevertheless, the enquiry officer viewed that the deposition of DW-1 was self contradictory as he stated that both the defaulter constables were not present at the time of PRG surveillance. The Enquiry Officer was satisfied that both the defaulter constables were detailed for duty with HC Iqbal Hussain No. 393/T near old iron bridge where RTV bearing No. DL-IV-7941 driven by DW 4 reached. It is not gainsaid that the standard of evidence available on record in the disciplinary enquiry was not such as could prove the allegation against the applicant beyond reasonable doubt. It is also worth mentioning that in the summary of allegation, it is alleged that seeing the PRG team coming towards them along with the owner of RTV, one Constable who was identified by Shri Gajender Singh as Ct. Sunil Kumar (Applicant) and the one who had taken Rs.200/- as entry money from him, fled from the spot in a silver colour motor cycle towards Gandhi Nagar taking wrong side of the road. The DW-1 supported the said factual position by deposing that Constable Sunil Kumar (applicant) proceeded to take food on a silver colour motor cycle. The fact of absence/missing of the applicant and the other Constable from the spot of duty would sufficiently lead to inference that the two Constables, including the applicant were involved in the misconduct. Had it not been so, there could be no reason for both of them to remain absent from duty at the same time. It cannot be a co-incident that at the same point of time, one of the Constables had to entertain his guests and the other one had to go for lunch. Had the applicant been innocent, he could have faced the PRG team with confidence. When the DW-2 narrated the apparent embellished story, he also accepted the factual position that the PRG team had visited the site. DW-3 reiterated the story narrated by DW-2. Indisputably, both DW-2 and DW-3 are drivers in Karkardooma Court. It is not understood how two drivers were required to go together for filling of petrol in single Government vehicle. The vehicle number is not mentioned by either of the defence witnesses. DW-4 i.e. the diver of RTV also confirmed the factual position narrated in summary of allegation that his vehicle was stopped by the Police Team (PRG). In other words, he supported the narration of incidence mentioned in the summary of allegation and denied only the fact of demanding money by stopping the vehicle by the charged official and demand of money. In other words, the DW-4, i.e. driver of the vehicle accepted the factual position that it was he who had been first intercepted by the PRG team and the said team had obtained the signature of the owner of the vehicle. The owner of the vehicle, who was examined as PW-5 had resiled from his earlier stand and deposed that the PRG team directly addressed him. From the statement of PW-5 who resiled from his earlier stand, it appears that the PRG team directly addressed him. From the statement of DW-4, it appears that the PRG team first addressed him and it was he who could point towards the owner of the vehicle. There is no reliable resemblance in the story narrated by PW-5 and DW-4. As has been noticed hereinabove, once the PW-4 deposed that the applicant fled on his motor cycle and the said fact was also confirmed by DW-1, it is established that the applicant had fled only after seeing the PRG team. Had he been innocent, on arrival of PRG team, he could have ensured his presence on duty at least till departure of the PRG team. It is also not understood that when the two drivers posted in Karkardooma Court preferred to take another Constable, namely Ajay Kumar Sharma No.3369/T for tea, how the DW-1 who was HC, did not accompany them. We are satisfied that there was sufficient circumstantial evidence to hold the charges against the applicant proved. Nevertheless, in view of the factual circumstances, there was preponderance of probability that the charges alleged against the applicant were correct. Probably it was for this reason only that the disciplinary authority did not impose very severe penalty upon the applicant and only imposed the penalty of forfeiture of two years approved service upon him. The disciplinary authority passed a detailed, speaking and reasoned order while imposing the aforementioned penalty. Relevant excerpts of the order passed by the disciplinary authority read as under:-

Sh.Gajender Singh, owner of the vehicle was brought back at the spot where Rs.200/- was taken from him as Entry Money. Seeing the PRG team coming towards them along with the owner of RTV, one constable who was identified by Gajender Singh as Ct. Sunil Kumar who had taken Rs.200/- as entry money from him, fled away from there on a silver colour M/Cycle towards Gandhi Nagar even taking wrong side of the road. The other constable identified by Gajender Singh as Ajay Sharma, who had first demanded Rs.1000/- from the owner of the vehicle and later on asked to give Rs.500/- to Ct. Sunil stopped a car and ran away in it. Gajender Singh also identified one HC Iqbal Hussain who was standing under the bridge at that time when the constables Ajay and Sunil had demanded entry money of Rs.1000/- and accepted Rs.200/- from him. The PRG team enquired about the name and numbers of the constables from the Head Constable who revealed their names as Ct. Sunil Kumar, 1658/T and Ct. Ajay Sharma No.3369/T. Photocopy of the R/C of the RTV duly signed by Gajender was obtained and his statement was also recorded.
Shri Gajender Singh, owner of the vehicle was brought back at the spot where Rs.200/- was taken from him as Entry Money. Seeing the PRG team coming towards them along with the owner of RTV, one Constable who was identified by Shri Gajender Singh as Constable Sunil Kumar and had taken Rs.200/- as Entry Money from him, fled away from there on a silver colour motorcycle towards Gandhi Nagar even taking wrong side of the road. The other Constable identified by Shri Gajender Singh as Ajay Sharma, who had first demanded Rs. 1,000/- from the owner of the vehicle and later on asked to give Rs.500/ to Constable Sunil Kumar, stopped a car and ran away in it. Shri Gajender Singh also identified one Head Constable Iqbal Hussain who was standing under the bridge at that time when the Constables Ajay Sharma and Sunil Kumar had demanded Entry Money of Rs.1,000/- and accepted Rs.200/- from him. The PRG team enquired about the name and numbers of both the Constables from the Head Constable who revealed their names as Constable Sunil Kumar No.1658/T and Ajay Sharma No.3369/T. Photocopy of the R/C of the RTV duly signed by Shri Gajender Singh was obtained and his statement was also recorded.