Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2012 DIGILAW 574 (JHR)

Court on its Own Motion v. State of Jharkhand

2012-04-16

APARESH KUMAR SINGH, PRAKASH TATIA

body2012
JUDGMENT By Court A letter dated 25th February, 2008 addressing to the Chief Justice, Jharkhand High Court, Ranchi was received by this Court, which was sent by Justice P.K. Sinha, Vice Chairman, Central Administrative Tribunal, Patna Bench, informing the unfortunate incident taken place on 21st February, 2008 with a Member of the Bangalore Bench of the Central Administrative Tribunal, namely, Shri B.V.Rao, who was holding the Circuit Sittings of the Tribunal. Shri B.V.Rao, Member (Judicial) sent a written report that in the late evening of 21st February, 2008 one Nirmala A. Choudhary, an IPS Officer in the rank of Inspector General, behaved rudely just on some suspicion of her own, without first ascertaining the identity of Shri Rao from officers of her own department who had reserved the suite for him, where Shri Rao was staying. Not only this, even after giving full information and identity of Shri Rao by himself , the officer by force opened the door and under her orders, security personnels throw away his belongings and Shri B.V.Rao was dragged by collar before the I.G. , Nirmala A. Choudhary. 2. Upon receipt of the aforesaid letter, this petition was registered by the Court and Advocate General assured that he will look into the matter and immediately proper action will be taken on the basis of the letter written by Shri Rao, Member (Judicial), Central Administrative Tribunal, Circuit Bench at Ranchi, obviously against the guilty officer. 3. During pendency of this petition, the matter came up for consideration before the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 23 of 2008 [ Incident Relating To Criminal Intimidation, To A Member of C.A.T. ...Petitioner Vrs. Union of India & Ors..... Respondents] and the Hon'ble Supreme Court observed that: “ This case is an eye opener as it reveals that those who have been assigned the solemn duty to dispense justice are facing criminal intimidation at the hands of the authorities which have the responsibility to maintain the law and order”. Union of India & Ors..... Respondents] and the Hon'ble Supreme Court observed that: “ This case is an eye opener as it reveals that those who have been assigned the solemn duty to dispense justice are facing criminal intimidation at the hands of the authorities which have the responsibility to maintain the law and order”. After taking note of the facts of the case from the written complaint of Shri Rao and initiation of contempt proceeding by the C.A.T. Bench at Patna against Smt.Nirmala A.Choudhary being Criminal Contempt Case No.22 of 2008, the Hon'ble Supreme Court observed that as the State of Jharkhand had conducted a full-fledged enquiry and submitted the report and considering the fact that the writ petition and criminal contempt petition are pending in Jharkhand High Court and in CAT Bench at Patna , it would not be proper to express any opinion as to what action is required to be taken against the erring officers. The Hon'ble Supreme Court further observed that concerned Court/Tribunal would proceed in accordance with law and undoubtedly the cases would reach to its logical end. 4. After the order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court passed in Writ Petition(Criminal)No. 23 of 2008 dated 25h August, 2009, it was informed to this Court that C.A.T. Patna , Circuit Bench at Ranchi vide order dated 19.5.2011 held the respondent-Mrs.Nirmala A.Choduhary, the then I.G. Of Police (Vigilance), Jharkhand State Electricity Board, Ranchi guilty for committing Criminal Contempt of Courts and she has been sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for 15 days. 5. This Court directed the State counsel to inform what happened to the criminal case which was registered against the said police officer under Section 143/144/146/323/339 and 352 IPC and also to inform this Court whether any departmental proceeding has been initiated against the said Smt.Nirmala A.Choudhary or not. 6. Now, it has been informed by the State that in the said criminal case, chargesheet has been filed and charges have been framed against the said Smt.Nirmala A.Choudhary. However, the State Government has decided not to proceed departmentally at this stage, obviously, it may be because of reason that the said officer has already been punished in Criminal Contempt Case and criminal case is pending in a court of competent jurisdiction and after decision in criminal case, if needed the officer may be proceeded departmentally. 7. However, the State Government has decided not to proceed departmentally at this stage, obviously, it may be because of reason that the said officer has already been punished in Criminal Contempt Case and criminal case is pending in a court of competent jurisdiction and after decision in criminal case, if needed the officer may be proceeded departmentally. 7. In view of the above reasons, when two matters are already pending, we need not to pass any further orders. Hence, this petition is disposed of.