Case Facts:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.8196 of 2003 =========================================================== Subrata Basu, S/o Late Sri Sailesh Chandra Basu, H/o S.N. Pandey, Shivaji Path, Yarpur, Patna-800001. .... .... Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Bihar. 2. Chief Secretary of the State of Bihar, Main Secretariat Building, Patna- 800015. 3. Secretary, Department of Personal and Administrative Reforms (Karmik), Government of Bihar, Main Secretariat Building, Patna-800015. 4. Dy. Secretary, Govt. of Bihar Main Secretariat Building Patna-15. .... .... Respondents =========================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ravi Shankar Ganguli, Adv. For the Respondent/s : Mr. Mruth Nath Roy, AC to SC-25 =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MIHIR KUMAR JHA ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 15-05-2012 Heard Mr. Ravi Shankar Ganguli, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Maruth Nath Roy, AC to SC-25 for the State. 2. In this writ application, the petitioner has prayed for quashing an order dated 25.6.2003 as contained in Annexure-1 passed by the Chief Secretary of the Government of Bihar directing the appeal of the petitioner against the order of dismissal from service dated 16.11.2001 passed on his conviction and sentence for life in criminal case for offence under [STATUTE] (in short I.P.C.) pending till disposal of his criminal appeal no. 523 of 2000 filed by him in this court against the judgment of the aforesaid conviction and sentence. The petitioner, by way of a consequential relief, has also sought a direction for Patna High Court CWJC No.8196 of 2003 dt.15-05-2012 2 commanding the Chief Secretary of the State of Bihar to allow his pending service appeal by setting aside the order of his punishment of dismissal from service dated 16.11.2001 (Annexure-2). 3. The facts giving rise to this writ application lie in a very narrow compass. The petitioner, while working as an Assistant in the Department of Cabinet Secretariat and Coordination Department, was made accused in a criminal case being Gardanibagh P.S. Case No. 564 of 1998 dated 17.9.1998 for offence under [STATUTE] . The petitioner was immediately taken into custody on 18.9.1998 and was also placed under suspension by an order dated 5.11.1998 in terms of Rule 3A(c) of the Bihar & Orissa Subordinate Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1935 (hereinafter to be referred to as „the 1935 Rules‟) which authorizes the appointing authority to place an employee governed by the Rules under suspension in respect of criminal offence under [STATUTE] . which is under investigation, enquiry or trial. In the trial which was undertaken immediately, the sessions court in Sessions Trial No. 1439 of 1998 by its judgment dated 28.9.2000 had held the petitioner guilty for offence under [STATUTE] . and had also sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life for offence under [STATUTE] . in addition to separate sentences of three years each rigorous imprisonment for offence Patna High Court CWJC No.8196 of 2003 dt.15-05-2012 3 under [STATUTE] . respectively. The petitioner, who as noted above, was taken into custody since 5.11.1998 soon after recording of F.I.R. and was in jail throughout the trial, however, was released on bail on 12.1.2001 in view of the order of this Court passed in the Criminal Appeal No. 523 of 2000. 4. The further case of the petitioner is that on 16.11.2001, in view of his being convicted and sentenced for life, was dismissed from service by the order of the competent appointing authority dated 16.11.2001. The petitioner thereafter had preferred an appeal on 3.9.2002 before the Chief Secretary being appellate authority in terms of Rule 8 of the Rules, which has been dealt and decided by the impugned order dated 25.6.2003 gist whereof is such appeal of the petitioner shall be kept pending till disposal of his Criminal Appeal No. 523 of 2000 pending before this Court. 5. In this case, initially a counter affidavit was filed by the respondents justifying the order of punishment of the dismissal of the petitioner on the ground that since the petitioner had been convicted for life in the aforementioned criminal case, he, in terms of proviso to Article 311(2)(a) of the Constitution of India, had been dismissed from service by an order dated 16.11.2001 and the appellate authority, in view of the pendency of the criminal appeal of the petitioner before this Court, had thought it prudent to await the Patna High Court CWJC No.8196 of 2003 dt.15-05-2012 4 decision of the Criminal Appeal, inasmuch as, the dismissal of the petitioner from service was based on the conviction and sentence in the Criminal Case. In the said counter affidavit, it has also been stated that the petitioner‟s initial appointment also was found to be bad and in view of the direction given by this Court in LPA No. 1511 of 1995, his appointment as a Bill Clerk and consequently any other appointment earned by him on the basis of his being Bill Clerk had been cancelled and as such, the petitioner could not be even otherwise reinstated in service till his order of termination of service dated 13.5.2002 was revoked by the competent authority/court. The respondents in defence of their action and the impugned order had also relied on a order of the learned single Judge dated 7.8.2000 in CWJC No. 7136 of 2000 (Shafiqur Rahman Vs. State of Bihar & Ors.) wherein it was held that whenever Shafiqur Rahman convicted in a criminal case would be acquitted from his charge in his pending Criminal Appeal, he will have the liberty to move the authority for recall of his order of dismissal dated 25.4.2000. 6. At the outset, it has to be kept in mind that the relief of the petitioner of his being retained in service despite his being a conv

Applicable IPC Section: 304B

Statute Text:
Section 304B of the Indian Penal Code. Dowry death. Where the death of a woman is caused by any burns or bodily injury or occurs otherwise than under normal circumstances within seven years of her marriage and it is shown that soon before her death she was subjected to cruelty or harassment by her husband or any relative of her husband for, or in connection with, any demand for dowry, such death shall be called "dowry death", and such husband or relative shall be deemed to have caused her death. Whoever commits dowry death shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than seven years but which may extend to imprisonment for life.