Delhi High Court Upholds Dismissal Of CRPF Constable For Consumption Of Liquor On Duty, Pointing Loaded Carbine Towards Another Officer
Observing that an officer of a force cannot be permitted to rebel the decisions of the competent authority, the Delhi High Court has upheld the dismissal of a former CRPF constable who was found a habitual offender for consuming liquor during duty hours and for misbehaving with a Sub-Inspector by directing a magazine-loaded carbine towards him in drunken state. Observing that such an officer...
Observing that an officer of a force cannot be permitted to rebel the decisions of the competent authority, the Delhi High Court has upheld the dismissal of a former CRPF constable who was found a habitual offender for consuming liquor during duty hours and for misbehaving with a Sub-Inspector by directing a magazine-loaded carbine towards him in drunken state.
Observing that such an officer of the Force is expected to deal with it with patience and mind, a division bench of Justice Suresh Kumar Kait and Justice Neena Bansal Krishna said:
“By pleading that since petitioner‟s leave was rejected, under tension and depression, he consumed liquor; petitioner has admitted before this Court that he is unable to handle the strain or stress, which is least expected from an officer of the Force. It is not only the medical condition wherein petitioner is found heavily drunk, the situation worsened with petitioner‟s pointing loaded carbine to another officer of the Force, which is a blunder on his part. The misconduct committed by the petitioner leaves no scope for leniency towards him.”
The court dismissed the constable’s plea and upheld the orders issued in 2009 by the Disciplinary Authority which were later confirmed by the Appellate and Reviewing Authorities, awarding the penalty of dismissal from service.
The constable had joined the services of CRPF on April 01, 1994, and was posted at 176 Battalion at Waripora, Jammu and Kashmir when a departmental enquiry was instituted against him under CRPF Rules, 1955.
Denying relief to the constable, the court agreed with the submission of the Union Government that a member of the Force is expected to be highly disciplined and cannot be permitted to do away with such like activities.
“Even though the petitioner has putforth another plea that he was asking for 15 days casual leave to attend his ailing wife, which was denied and so, he had consumed liquor. This Court finds that grant or rejection of leave is the prerogative of the competent authority of respondents, who while taking such decision, might take into consideration the other administrative and official factors, besides considering the personal requests of the applicant,” the court said.
Title: EX CT/GD OM PARKASH v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS.
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 549