HC refuses to cancel termination orders of constantly absent police

The Punjab and Haryana high court has refused to set aside the dismissal order of a policeman who was cited for continuous absence by the Punjab Police.

While rejecting the 1999 order, the bench of justice Jagmohan Bansal said, “Since the petitioner, despite being a member of the disciplined police force, was constantly absent and did not correct his behavior, this court does not find it appropriate to review the quantum of punishment imposed on him.” request of ex-cop Daljit Singh.

Singh had approached the high court in 1999 after he was suspended for the second time by the then Ludhiana senior superintendent of police (SSP) for failing to do so. He joined the police force as a police officer in 1986 and was off duty from December 1, 1992 to February 22, 1993. A prosecutor’s investigation was opened against him and he was dismissed on March 5, 1994. He appealed to the high court against this decision. The court overturned the police’s decision while giving the police freedom to conduct a new investigation. However, he again chose not to come while the investigation was ongoing. He was dismissed for the second time on August 31, 1995, for not participating in the investigation.

His counsel had argued that his action was not a gross misconduct under Rule 16.2 of the Punjab Police Rules, 1934, which warrants dismissal, and therefore, the impugned decision was clearly bad in law and deserved to be set aside.

The court underlined that the applicant was part of a force “where the issue of discipline is very important”.

The court took into account two decisions; In a decision, the top court said that the court should not cancel the dismissal order if the offender is serving in the armed forces and is not on duty. In its second decision, the high court said that the absence of a man in uniform from duty was the gravest act of abuse of power. The court dismissed the petition as “lacking merit” and ruled that it deserved to be dismissed.