Research › Search › Judgment

Madhya Pradesh High Court · body

2011 DIGILAW 424 (MP)

Raju Dahiya v. State of M. P.

2011-04-05

SANJAY YADAV

body2011
JUDGMENT : Heard on admission. Vide this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India the petitioner seeks direction to the respondents to re-engage him in service as daily wager. The petitioner was engaged on daily wages on 01-10-1990 in the office of Executive Engineer, Public Health Engineering Department, Satna. The petitioner discharged his duties in the said capacity till 27-11-2000. On 28-11-2000 the petitioner was arrested for an offence under section 325 of the Indian Penal Code, he was released on bail on 13-01-2001. However, when he presented himself before the respondents, he was not taken on duty. The criminal prosecution forming subject matter of S.T. No. 86/2001 culminated into an order dated 25-11-2002 by Third Additional Sessions Judge, Satna; whereby, the petitioner was convicted and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for one year and a fine of Rs. 1,000/- or in default of payment of fine, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 6 months. An appeal preferred by the petitioner before this Court vide Criminal Appeal No. 1965/2002 resulted in upholding of said conviction, however, keeping in view the facts of the entire case and that the petitioner had already undergone about four months of jail sentence, the sentence of one year imprisonment and a fine of Rs.1,000/- passed by the trial Court was modified to the extent that the appellant instead of being sentenced to imprisonment and fine shall be released on probation of good conduct for a period of one year on furnishing a personal bond for the sum of Rs. 10,000/- to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate. It was clarified that during the said period if any offence is committed by the appellant/petitioner herein, he shall be called upon to receive the sentence already awarded. In addition thereto and invoking section 5 of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 it was directed that the appellant shall pay a sum of Rs. 6,000/- as compensation to widow Chandrakali Singh (PW-4) of Shashibhan Singh within a period of two months. Taking add of the aforesaid order passed in Criminal Appeal No. 1965/2002, the petitioner has approached this Court vide present writ petition seeking direction to the respondents to reinstate him on daily wages as the stigma inflicted upon him vide conviction order dated 25-11-2002 has been diluted as find mention in the order. Taking add of the aforesaid order passed in Criminal Appeal No. 1965/2002, the petitioner has approached this Court vide present writ petition seeking direction to the respondents to reinstate him on daily wages as the stigma inflicted upon him vide conviction order dated 25-11-2002 has been diluted as find mention in the order. After giving a thoughtful consideration to the submissions put forth by the learned counsel for the petitioner this Court is of the opinion that no relief can be granted to the petitioner as he stands convicted for an offence under section 325 of the Indian Penal Code and though the rigors of undergoing a sentence has been modified vide appellate order, the conviction still subsists. Being a daily wager the petitioner has no substantive right to hold the post. Since no lien is created, the petitioner has no right to claim re-engagement. In view whereof, the petition being devoid of substance, is hereby dismissed. However, there shall be no order as to costs.