Case Facts:
Patna High Court CWJC No.9314 of 1998 dt.06-02-2012 1 / 6 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.9314 of 1998 =========================================== 1.Narendra Kumar Jha @ Narendra Jha son of Sri Bhalchandra Jha, resident of village Kataiya, P.S.Benipatti District Madhubani. .... .... Petitioner/s Versus 1.The State Of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Govt. of Bihar, Old Secretariat, Patna. 2.The D.G. cum-I.G. of Police, Bihar, Old Secretariat, Patna. 3.The D.I.G. of Police, Darbhanga Range, Darbhanga. 4.S.P.,Samastipur. 5.A.I.G., Personal, Bihar, Patna. .... .... Respondent/s =========================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ram Hriday Prasad & Mr. Sanjiva Kumar, Adv. For the Respondent/s : Mr. Sunil Kumar Ravi, A.C. to AAG-III. =========================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVAJI PANDEY ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 06-02-2012 In this case petitioner has basically challenged the order of dismissal passed by the Superintendent of Police, Samastipur dated 28th September 1995 (Annexure-4) and on appeal, the same was rejected by the Deputy Inspector General of Police, vide order dated 9th September 1996 (Annexure-5) and the Director General of Police affirmed both orders while rejecting the memorial of petitioner vide order dated 25th September 1998 (Annexure-6). 2. During the relevant period, petitioner was posted at Narhan Bazar in the district of Samastipur and he was charge-sheeted for his grave misconduct vide charge-sheet dated 13th September 1989 (Annexure-1). In the charge-sheet, the basic charges were as follows: i) Petitioner assaulted Paro Devi. Patna High Court CWJC No.9314 of 1998 dt.06-02-2012 2 / 6 2 ii) He came to the Guard returned with service rifle along with his one associate which caused commotion in the market. iii) He fired twice, killed one person and injured four persons which led to filing of Bibhutipur P.S.Case No. 34 of 1989 for the offences [STATUTE] at the petitioner was posted at Bibhutipur, Narhan Bazar for maintaining law and order . On 6th March 1989, petitioner along with Ramrup Singh Yadav went to purchase vegetable. While purchasing vegetable (potato) from vendor Paro Devi, there was oral altercation in bargaining the price for 25 paise only and ultimately Paro Devi returned the money to him with some comments. Thereafter petitioner and his friend picked up an altercation with her husband and Paro Devi so much so that they had also assaulted the husband of Paro Devi, returned to the guards and thereafter they took their service rifle and came back to the market in agitated condition and assaulted with Lathi causing injury to the persons concerned and thereafter they had also resorted to firing which caused bullet injury and the person died. The incident was so grave, the District Magistrate and the Superintendent of Police made a joint inspection and submitted their joint report found the petitioner had acted illegally had caused death of one person and caused grievous injury to others. 4. A departmental proceeding was initiated against the petitioner, vide Departmental Enquiry No. 92 of 1989. Petitioner appeared in departmental enquiry for few dates and thereafter he left to participate. In the departmental enquiry, witnesses were examined and they supported the charges. In the enquiry, the joint report of the District Magistrate and the Superintendent of Police was also exhibited. On the basis of evidence on record, the Enquiry Officer submitted Patna High Court CWJC No.9314 of 1998 dt.06-02-2012 3 / 6 3 the enquiry report, found the charges proved which led to giving a second show cause notice to the petitioner which the petitioner replied. The disciplinary authority i.e. the Superintendent of Police considered every aspect of the matter, and found the charges were proved, accordingly, petitioner was dismissed from service. At this place it will be also relevant to mention that for same incident as criminal case was lodged against the petitioner and he was convicted in the criminal case and was sentenced for 5 years R.I. [STATUTE] with a fine of Rs.200/- which is apparent from Annexure-3 to the writ petition. It appears from the said Annexure that the petitioner filed a criminal appeal before this Court as has been informed, the same has been dismissed. 5. Now it is admitted position that the petitioner was not only dismissed from service in the departmental proceeding but also has been convicted and sentenced for the same incident which has been upheld by this Court in appeal. After dismissal, petitioner filed the appeal which was dismissed and ultimately, the memorial met with the same fate which is under challenge before this Court. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner stated that it was basically a private dispute and for that petitioner should not have been proceeded in a departmental proceeding, as it had nothing to do with his official duty. It has further been stated that though the petitioner was convicted in a criminal case, the authority in stead of passing the order of dismissal, should have passed order giving lesser punishment and the order of dismissal is arbitrary and disproportionate to the charges. In support of this contention, learned counsel for the petitioner relied on an unreported judgment passed in C.W.J.C.No. 861 of 2010 (Shiva Nandan Prasad @ Shivaji Prasad v. The State of Bihar and others). Patna High Court CWJC No.9314 of 1998 dt.06-02-2012 4 / 6 4 7. Learned counsel for the State has disputed the argument and stated that the petitioner being in Police service was required to maintain the law and order and safety of persons, instead he for a petty matter picked the dispute with lady, committed such a grave conduct of firing from his service rifle causing injury to innocent person also killed one person which is a grave

Applicable IPC Section: 307

Statute Text:
Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code. Attempt to murder. Whoever does any act with such intention or knowledge, and under such circumstances that, if he by that act caused death, he would be guilty of murder, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine; and, if hurt is caused to any person by such act, the offender shall be liable either to imprisonment for life, or to such punishment as is hereinbefore mentioned. Attempts by Life Convicts: When any person offending under this section is under sentence of imprisonment for life, he may, if hurt is caused, be punished with death.