The Division Bench of Justice Subrata Talukdar and Justice Supratim Bhattacharya of the Calcutta High Court in the case of Julficar Sardar Vs The State of West Bengal & Ors held that a volunteer of a disciplined force is required to have a clean antecedent as regards to his character. It was noted that Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code of 1860 is a serious offence and the criminal proceedings were pending before the Court, the Petitioner could not be allowed to rejoin the service.
Brief Facts:
The factual matrix of the case was that the Petitioner, a home guard, was denied permission to join his duty as he was implicated in a criminal case following a dispute between the Petitioner's family and the family of his relatives.
Aggrieved by this, the Petitioner filed several writ petitions which were dismissed, and hence, the present appeal has been preferred.
Contentions of the Petitioner:
It was contended that the criminal proceedings were initiated on false allegations against the Petitioner. It was further contended that there are no criminal antecedents.
Contentions of the Respondents:
It was submitted that as per Rule 9 of the West Bengal Home Guard Rules, 1962, the appointing authority’s decision regarding the appointment/removal is final and it has sufficient power to remove those with proven misconduct. It was further submitted that the second round of litigation was barred by res judicata as the issue had been settled by the first round of litigation.
Observations of the Court:
It was noted that as per the Home Guard Act of 1962, home guards are volunteers. The volunteer of a disciplined force is required to have a clean antecedent. It was opined that a member of a disciplined force should have a clear reputation, which the Appellant/Petitioner has damaged through his prior actions.
It was noted that Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code of 1860 is a serious offence and the criminal proceedings were pending before the Court, the Petitioner could not be allowed to rejoin the service.
The Decision of the Court:
The Hon’ble High Court found no infirmity in the High Court’s judgement and order passed by the Single-Bench. Accordingly, the appeal was dismissed.
Case Title: Julficar Sardar Vs The State of West Bengal & Ors
Case No: FMA 2689 of 2015
Coram: Hon’ble Justice Subrata Talukdar and Hon’ble Justice Supratim Bhattacharya
Advocate for the Appellant: Mr. Ajay Debnath Mr. Pradip Kar Mr. Sujit Saha Mr. Devranjan Das Mr. Asit Kumar De
Advocate for the State: Mr. Supriyo Chattopadhyay Ms. Tapati Samant
Social media is young.
Social media raises questions.
Social media is not satisfied with an answer.
Social media looks at the big picture.
Social media is interested in every detail.
social media is curious.
Social media is free.
Social media is irreplaceable.
But never irrelevant.
Social media is you.
(With input from news agency language)
If you like this story, share it with a friend!
0 Comments