Punjab & Haryana HC Sets Aside Enhanced Punishment Imposed On Cop For Alleged Misconduct In Stopping Minor's Bike

 The Punjab & Haryana High Court has set aside the enhanced punishment imposed on a Punjab Police official for alleged misconduct in stopping a minor boy's vehicle. The boy was found with condoms and later died by suicide after being scolded by his father, who had been called by the police.

Justice Jagmohan Bansal said, "the petitioner committed alleged misconduct while discharging his official duties. He was awarded punishment of forfeiture of two increments for the alleged misconduct. The petitioner had not illegally or unofficially detained vehicle of a minor child. It was father of the child who scolded him. The petitioner could not be held responsible for the unfortunate incident to the extent that his rank is reduced from Assistant Sub-Inspector (Local Rank) to Constable."

The plea was filed by Sham Kumar seeking setting aside of order whereby respondent has enhanced punishment awarded by Disciplinary Authority.

Facts In Brief

The petitioner joined Punjab Police as Constable in 1989. In 2020, while  holding local rank of in the course of his official duty stopped one vehicle which was being driven by a minor. He checked storage box of the two-wheeler and found two condoms. Father of the minor child reached there and scolded his son. After 2-3 days, child committed suicide. The Department initiated proceedings against the petitioner which culminated in forfeiture of two increments with permanent effect.

Kumar unsuccessfully preferred appeal before the Appellate Authority and preferred appeal before the Government which came up for consideration before Home Secretary.

He was seeking setting aside of forfeiture of two increments, however, Home Secretary without issuing him any notice, enhanced punishment awarded by Disciplinary Authority.

The punishment of forfeiture of two increments was substituted by reduction in rank and he was reduced to rank of Constable.

After hearing the submissions, the Court noted that the State Government in terms of Rule 16.28 of Punjab Police Rules (PPR )has power to call for the records and review the awards made by Inspector General of Police (IGP) or any other authority subordinate to him. As conceded by both sides, at present, Head of Police Force is DGP, thus, expression IGP used in PPR needs to be substituted with DGP.

Referring to Powers to review proceedings of PPR, the Court said, "it is quite evident that punishment can be enhanced while exercising power of review and said power can be exercised after granting opportunity of hearing as well as issuing show cause notice. In the case in hand, the respondent has enhanced punishment awarded by Authorities below while adjudicating appeal filed by petitioner."

Justice Bansal highlighted that it is a settled proposition of law that Appellate Authority can enhance penalty if there is specific provision and in the absence of provision, Appellate Authority cannot enhance penalty.

"The stand of respondent that power has been exercised under Rule 16.28 of PPR is misconceived because respondent has passed impugned order while adjudicating appeal of the petitioner," the Court added.

The judge opined that apart from the above, the impugned order deserves to be set aside on merits.

"If findings of Home Secretary are upheld, no police official would be able to take action against erring persons," observed the Court.

In the light of the above, the Court set aside the Impugned order and restored the order of DGP.

Mr. Sahil Soi, Advocate for the petitioner

Mr. Aman Dhir, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab

Title: Sham Kumar v. State of Punjab and others

Click here to read/download the order