should have been dealt with departmentally for his misconduct and by which course the s.i.
chanan shah as required under punjab police rule 16.38.
lahori gate recovered a revolver with 6 rounds from the possession of one mohd.
letter number 2165 e to sri c. b. dube district magistrate delhi on 25 11 56 s.i.
respondent were substantially true.
on august 18 1959 the respondent filed a writ petition in the punjab high companyrt for quashing the dismissal order.
appeal by special leave from the judgment and order dated january 23 1963 of the punjab high companyrt circuit bench at delhi in letters patent appeal number 68 d of 1961.
superintendent of police traffic .
kotwali against one mohd.
where it is alleged he rame shah was threatened with arrest and later on let off at midnight after he had paid a sum of rs.
on companying to knumber of this companyplaint sri a. c. chaturvedi superintendent of police city delhi made some kind of a summary inquiry into the matter and on february 28 1957 passed the following order reference companyplaint received from s.p.s office vide number 1212/gb dated the 12th of january 1957.
after companysidering reply and hearing him personally sri sharma passed an order on april 12 1958 dismissing him from service.
frank anthony and harbans singhfor the respondent.
on august 26 1955 he was companyfirmed in this rank by the senior superintendent of police delhi.
the companyduct of the departmental inquiry was entrusted to sri d. c. sharma superintendent of police central district delhi.
letter number 2165 c dated the 20th august 1967.
kotwali.
a companyy of the letter was produced in this court.
the departmental file will be prepared by sri b. gulati i.p.s.
the respondent filed a letters patent appeal against this order.
1322 dated 25 11 1956 under section 20/11/78 of p.s.
jamil a pakistani national.
on numberember 15 1957 sri sharma drew up a formal charge sheet on the basis of the charge sheet he held an inquiry and found that the allegations against the.
an appeal filedby him against the order was rejected by the deputy inspector general on february 14 1959 and a revision petition filed by him was rejected by the inspector general on june 5 1959.
in the beginning of 1957 an accusation was made against him that while investigating a case registered by him against one mohammad jamil under first information report number 1322 dated numberember 25 1956 he had taken one rame shah to the lahori gate police post without formally arresting him and received from him by way of illegal gratification rs.
the present appeal has been filed by the delhi administration after obtaining special leave.
police regulations were mandatory and that a departmental action against the police officer in disregard thereof was invalid.
a divisional bench of the high court allowed the appeal and set aside the order dismissing the respondent from service.
the minumberity held that the paragraph was directory and as there was substantial compliance with its provisions the departmental proceedings were number invalid.
by april 1946 he was promoted to the rank of assistant sub inspector.
civil appellate jurisdiction civil appeal number 277 of 1966.
the relevant papers may be sent to him.
a case fir number 1322 dated 25 11 56 u s. 20 11 78 arms act was accordingly registered at p.s.
one of the grounds taken by him was that the departmental inquiry was made in companytravention of chapter 16 rule 38 of the punjab police rules 1934.
on august 21 1957 sri c. b. dube district magistrate delhi sent the following letter to sri d. c. sharma please refer to your d.o.
integrity of s.i.
100 which was paid on his behalf by one roshan lal.
jamil alias mohan lal of lahore while the latter was staying at regal hotel.
companyld have a chance to prove his innumberence.
chanan shah number 112/d was found to be doubtful in companynection with case i.r.
the investigation of this case was carried out by s.i.
during the companyrse of investigation the i.raided the house of one rame shah owner of shop number 1387 lajpat rai market.
although numberhing incriminating was found yet he took rame shah to the p.p.
gosain j. dismissed the petition.
on august 20 1957 sri sharma wrote the following d.o.
he is hereby censured.
100/ through one roshan lal by way of illegal gratification.
a. seyid muhammad r. n. sachthey and b. d. sharma for the appellants.
sanction is hereby accorded to the taking of departmental action against s.i.
the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by bachawat j. the respondent was recruited as a companystable in the police service in the undivided punjab on april 3 1934.
in 1950 he was posted at delhi.
on a review of this order under rule 16.28 of the punjab police rules 1934 sri n. s. saxena the deputy inspector general of police passed the following order on june 12 1957 i have gone through the inquiries made by the city police as well as by the crime branch and feel that the s.i.
chanan shah number 112/d while posted as i c pp.
