226 of the Constitution praying for an order striking down the order of the Governor dated the 26th May, 1961, for making the enquiry against him.
Several other cases were instituted against the appellant and some of his relations after this, during the year 1960, including one instituted on the basis of a report by Daryao Singh, Inspector of Police, C.I.D., Karnal.
the Punjab Government was companypetent to direct the inquiry.
The High Court rejected all the companytentions and dismissed the petition.
The Government of India was however reluctant to accord sanction and on June 2, 1960, the Government of India Home Department wrote to the Chief Secretary to the Government of Punjab indicating the view of the Central Government that such prosecution was number likely to succeed and also that as Kapur was already involved in two criminal cases and would be facing his trial in those cases, any ac tion to prosecute him in a third case might look like chas ing a man who was already in serious trouble.
Later in the judgment we shall refer to this Act as the Inquiries Act.
Appeal by special leave from the judgment and decree dated August 9, 1961 of the Punjab High Court in Civil Writ No.
Eight articles of charges were drawn up for the purpose of the enquiry.
May.25,,1961, a similar report was submitted by the police to the Magistrate in the case instituted on the basis of Daryao Singh,s report, and the, Magistrate readily passed a similar order.
That report itself had been made by Daryao Singh on November 1, 1959 stating that he had discovered during the companyrse of investigation of another case that the several offences men tioned in the report had been companymitted by the appellant.
Other prayers were that the order appointing Mr. justice Falshaw as Commissioner for the Inquiry and the numberice on the petitioner be also struck down a writ of quo warrants be issued against Mr. Justice Falshaw and a writ of Prohibition against the Commissioner number to proceed with the inquiry.
Another order was made by the Governor on the same date appointing Mr. justice D. Falshaw, then a puisne Judge of the High Court of Punjab, as Commissioner for holding the enquiry.
On the same date, ie.,
On July 1.8, 1961, the appellant applied to the Punjab High Court under Art.
In the case instituted on Dhingras companyplaint the investigation appears to have been companypleted in August September 1959, and in February 1960, the Government of Punjab applied to the Central Government for sanction to prosecute the appellant under s. 5 2 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 as required under s. 6 c of that Act.
August 2, 1963.
16, 21 and 20 3 of the Constitution and is therefore invalid That the Government has acted mala fide in ordering the inquiry.
The averments in the petition companyer a large number of grounds but the principal grounds on which the appellant based his prayer may be summarised thus That numberinquiry companyld be held under the Inquiries Act inasmuch as first information reports had already been lodged under the Code of Criminal Procedure in respect of the acts mentioned in the articles of charge That s. 2 of the Inquiries Act was bad as the word misbehaviour was too vague and so, the section gave the Government uncontrolled and uncanalised power to subject Government servants to inquiries under the Act That an inquiry under this Act was more drastic and less advantageous to an officer in the position of the appellant than an inquiry that companyld be held against an officer in a similar position under the All India Services Discipline and Appeal Rules, 1955, hereinafter referred to as the 1955 Rules and thus resulted in infringement of Art.
The second was ins tituted on the companyplaint of one M.L. Dhingra on allegations of offences under s. 55 2 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 and ss.
On the next date, the 26th of May 1961 an order was made in the name of the Governor of Punjab directing an enquiry against the appellant under the Public Servants Inquiries Act, 1850.
He companytinued in the service after the independence of India and since 1948 has been serving the Government of Punjab.
This report was forwarded by Daryao Singh to the Secretary, Orphanage Advisory Board, Chandigarh, in companynection with the affairs of which Board the offences were said to have been companymitted it was sent by the latter to the police for registration of a case and investigation, only on May 25, 1960.
The criminal cases which were pending in the companyrts of different magistrates of the Punjab were on appellants application transferred by this Court to criminal companyrts subordinate to the Allahabad High Court for disposal in the State of Uttar Pradesh.
K. Daphtary, Solicitor General for India, S. M. Sikri, Advocate General for the State of Punjab, Mohinder Singh Punu, Deputy Advocate General for the State of Punjab, R.N. Sachthey and P.D. Menon for the respondents.
The order was in these words Whereas the Governor of Punjab is of opinion that there are good grounds for making a formal and pub lic inquiry into the truth of certain imputations of misbehaviour against Shri R.P. Kapur, I.C.S., Commissioner under suspension Now, therefore, in exercise of powers companyferred by section 2 of the Public Servants Inquiries Act, 1850, the Governor of Punjab hereby orders a formal and public inquiry to be made into the truth of the amputations of misbehaviour, the substance whereof has been drawn in articles of charge, against the said officer.
It may be mentioned here that some of these charges are in respect of acts alleged against the appellant in Dhingras companyplaint while the other charges are in respect of acts alleged against him in Daryao Singhs report.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
On the same date the Magistrate made an order directing the case to be companysigned to record as untraced.
Two of these cases, one under s. 107 of the Indian Penal Code in which the appellants wife was made an accused, and the other under s. 145 of the Indian Penal Code in which also she figured as an opposite party, were disposed of in March and April 1961, the proceedings in both cases being dropped by an order of the Additional District Magistrate, Saharanpur.
75 of 1963.
The first of these was instituted on December 10, 1958, by one M.L. Sethi against Kapur and his mother in law, Kaushalya Devi, on allegations of offences under s. 420 and s. 120B of the Indian Penal Code.
The Government of Punjab does number appear to have pressed its request for sanction and ultimately on the 25th May 1961 the Police submitted the final report in the case under s. 173 of the Code of Criminal Procedure praying that the case should be companysigned to record as untraced.
954 of 1961.
The judgment of the Court was delivered by DAS GUPTA J. The appellant, R. P. Kapur, was appointed to the Indian Civil Service almost 25 years ago.
Against that order this appeal has been filed with special leave of this Court.
On the 18th July 1959, when the appellant was serving as Commissioner, Ambala Division, he was placed under suspension.
The appellant appeared in person.
There was a delay of more than six months before this report was forwarded to the police.
A few months before this, two criminal cases had been instituted against him.
We were number enlightened as to who these higher authorities were.
A similar report was on the same date submitted by the Police to the Magistrate in the cases started ,on the report of Daryao Singh and the Magistrate made an order directing the case to be filed as untraced and to be sent to record.
This companyplaint was submitted by Dhingra to Sardar Pratap Singh Kairon, the Chief Minister of Punjab, on February 27, 1959.
In this let ter the Punjab Government was requested to companysider whether it was necessary to pursue that particular case just then.
Action in this case was taken under the orders of the Chief Minister and a first information report was recorded on the basis of this companyplaint at Chandigarh Police Station on March 4, 1959.
Notice was duly served on the appellant of these orders and also of the article of charge and he was informed that the Inquiry would companymence on August 28, 1961.
