Punjab and Haryana High Court Upholds Dismissal of CRPF Constable for Indecent Gesture, Liquor Consumption During Duty Hours

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has upheld an order of dismissal of a Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF) constable for making indecent gestures towards a senior female officer and wandering around the mess while being under the influence of alcohol during duty hours.

A bench comprising Justice Harsimran Singh Sethi observed,

"The member of the disciplinary force cannot act in a manner in which the appellant had acted even if there was no other blot in the service career of the appellant but misbehaving with a senior lady official and that too, under the influence of liquor is to be dealt with in a stringent manner so as to set an example for others. In the facts and circumstances, it cannot be said that the punishment imposed upon the appellant is disproportionate to the charges alleged and proved."

Background

The appellant Hira Lal, was selected as constable in CRPF in January 1982. In 1999, a charge sheet was issued to him under the CRPF Act. The first allegation against him was that as a constable, he had misbehaved with a sub inspector/steno in a recreation room of the mess during lunch times, waving his hand in a way which amounted to indecent gesture. The other allegation was that he was under the influence of the liquor at the relevant time while present in the mess area, which is also not permissible to the members of the disciplinary force and that too, during the duty hours.

The appellant was dismissed from service in the year 2000, after an inquiry found both the allegations against him to be true.

He had filed a civil suit in the lower court against his dismissal, wherein it was held that once the procedure under Section 11 of the CRPF Act was initiated for imposing the minor punishment, the major punishment could not have been imposed upon the appellant and suit was decreed. Aggrieved against the decision, Union of India filed an appeal before the lower Appellate Court, wherein the judgment and decree of the trial Court was set aside and the suit filed by the appellant-plaintiff was dismissed. Hence, he moved to the high court with the present Regular Second Appeal.

It was argued before the court that the appellant had 17 years of service to his credit and charges alleged against him are such that the punishment of dismissal imposed upon him is not commensurate to the charges alleged and proved. 

HC Verdict

Justice Sethi placed reliance on the Apex Court's judgement in Anil Kumar Upadhyay Vs.The Director General, SSB and others Civil Appeal No.2707 of 2022 wherein it was observed that a member of the disciplined force is expected to follow the rules, have control over his mind and passion, guard his instincts and feelings and not allow his feelings to fly in a fancy. In the said case, the appellant therein had entered Mahila Barrack in the midnight and due to the misconduct, the punishment of removal from service was imposed upon him by the disciplinary authority, which punishment was upheld by the Court.

“The case of the appellant herein also falls within the parameters of the law settled in Anil Kumar Upadhyay’s case (supra) and deserves no leniency by the Court," said the bench. 

The court said no ground is made out for interference in the judgment and decree of the lower Appellate Court "as no perversity could be pointed out either on facts or on law."

Case Title: Hira Lal vs. Union of India and others RA No.28 of 2022

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (PH) 55

Click Here To Read/Download Judgment