STATE TIMES NEWS
JAMMU: A Division Bench of State High Court, comprising Chief Justice N Paul Vasanthakumar and Justice Tashi Rabstan, while dismissing the appeal of a cop regarding reinstatement of service, Friday, ruled it cannot allow persons serving in police force and providing information to the militants to continue in service as the consequences of doing so would be disastrous.
According to an appeal, Mohammed Rafi was appointed as Constable on April, 26, 1999 and was allowed to join the duties, subject to CID verification.
The case of the respondents was that his brother was involved in some militant activities and in that regard, FIR No. 62/1999 came to be registered on November, 19, 1999 for offence under section 212 RPC.
The appellant was also involved in the crime and arrested in the said FIR and in view of his arrest, he was discharged from the service during probation period by order dated March, 27, 2000 with immediate effect.
“The said order was challenged before this Court by filing SWP No. 435/2000 and the challenge in respect of discharge was not pressed by the learned counsel who appeared for the appellant and consciously made a submission at the time of hearing the said writ petition to the effect that the appellant may be allowed to face trial and dependent upon the determination of the criminal proceedings, his claim may be considered. This Court, therefore, held that his case be considered after the verdict in criminal case and even if he was acquitted based on other materials”.
The Criminal Court by order dated November, 29, 2000 acquitted the appellant by specifically stating that the prosecution has failed to produce witnesses to prove the guilt of the appellant satisfactorily. After his acquittal, the appellant submitted a representation for his reinstatement after the criminal case acquittal which was rejected by the respondents on August, 07, 2001 stating that the appellant as Constable, being an upper ground worker of HM outfit and was involved in providing information and food to the militants, his case for reinstatement is not prima facie made out and therefore the request for reinstatement cannot be accepted. The said order was challenged before this Court by filing SWP No. 3227/2001 and the writ court dismissed the writ petition by order dated April 21, 2006.
Division Bench, after hearing Adv Sheikh Altaf Hussain for the appellant and AAG WS Nargal for the state, observed that the appellant’s ground was given up during the earlier round of litigation and the appellant took a stand to wait for the disposal of the criminal case.
“The only point which can be adjudicated upon is that after acquittal whether the appellant can seek reinstatement. The appellant was acquitted not on merits and the acquittal was recorded on the basis that the prosecution failed to produce the supporting witnesses and allegation made against the appellant in this case is that he used to provide information and food to support the militants. If the person serving in police force is providing information to the militants is allowed to continue in service the consequences will be disastrous”, with these observations the Division Bench dismissed the appeal.
