Excelsior Correspondent
JAMMU, Mar 4: Division Bench of State High Court comprising Chief Justice N Paul Vasanthakumar and Justice Tashi Rabstan today held that if a person serving in police force is allowed to continue even after being noticed providing information to the militants the consequences will be disastrous.
The DB made these observations while dismissing an appeal of a cop regarding his reinstatement. The appellant Mohd Rafi was appointed as constable by order dated 26.04.1999. However, the appointment made was subject to CID verification. During verification, he was found involved in extending help to the militants and for this act he was even arrested. In view of his arrest, he was discharged from the service during probation period by order dated 27.03.2000.
This order was challenged before the court and the counsel who appeared for the appellant made a submission that appellant may be allowed to face trial and dependent upon the determination of the criminal proceedings, his claim may be considered.
The 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 29.11.2000 acquitted the appellant by specifically stating that the prosecution has failed to produce the witnesses to prove the guilt of the appellant satisfactorily.
After his acquittal, the appellant submitted a representation for his reinstatement which was rejected by the respondents on 07.08.2001 on the ground that being an upper ground worker of HM outfit his case for reinstatement is not prima facie made out and therefore the request for reinstatement cannot be accepted.
This order was challenged before the court and the writ court dismissed the petition by order dated 21.04.2006. Mohd Rafi then challenged the order of writ court before the Division Bench.
After hearing Advocate Sheikh Altaf Hussain for the appellant whereas AAG WS Nargal for the State, the DB observed, “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”.
“The 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”, the DB said while dismissing the appeal.
Trending Now
E-Paper
Follow our WhatsApp channel