Case Facts:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.12720 of 2005 ====================================================== RAGHUBAR PASWAN, SON OF LATE JHALKI PASWAN, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE AND POST BHADAURA, P.S. MASAURHI, DISTRICT PATNA, BIHAR .... .... Petitioner/s Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE CUM DISTRICT REGISTRAR, PATNA, DISTRICT PATNA. 3. THE SECRETARY CUM INSPECTOR GENERAL OF REGISTRATION, BIHAR, PATNA. 4. THE DISTRICT SUB-REGISTRAR, PATNA, DISTRICT PATNA. 5. THE SUB-REGISTRAR, MASAURHI, SUB-DIVISION OFFICE, MASAURHI, DISTRICT PATNA. 6. THE ACCOUNTANT GENERAL(A & E), II, BIHAR, PATNA. .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. M.P. Dixit Mr. Sanjay Kumar Dixit Mr. Sanjay Kr. Choubey For the Respondent/s : Mr. Binit Kumar, AC to GA-9 For Accountant General : Mr. Sanjay Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.N. SINHA ORAL ORDER 4 09-05-2012 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, the State and the Accountant General. 2. Petitioner superannuated with effect from 31.12.2002 while serving as Clerk in the office of Sub-Registrar, Masaurhi in the district of Patna. He has filed this writ petition praying inter alia to quash the office order bearing Memo No.1785 dated 17.08.2004, Annexure-3 whereunder having considered the show cause reply of the petitioner received in response to the notice dated 29.05.2004, his pension has been reduced by 10% in Patna High Court CWJC No.12720 of 2005 (4) dt.09-05-2012 2/3 purported exercise of power under Rule 139(c) of the Bihar Pension Rules as the cause shown by him in response to notice dated 29.05.2004 that he did not inform the authorities about the factum of judicial custody during the period between 3.12.1998- 25.12.1998 in connection with Masaurhi P.S. Case No.167/98 registered for the offence under [STATUTE] . It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the impugned order is vitiated on both the grounds of merit as also technical ground as according to the petitioner Rule 139(c) of the Bihar Pension Rules is not applicable to the present case, which empower the authorities to reduce the pension of the pensioner in either of the two eventualities i.e. the service record of the pensioner is not satisfactory or he is found guilty of proven misconduct. On merit it is submitted that after petitioner was taken into custody in Masaurhi P.S. Case No.167/98 he informed the Sub-Registrar, Masaurhi through his son about the factum of his custody though on false allegation, which was duly conveyed by the Sub-Registrar to the District Registrar under Memo No.349 dated 7.12.1998 but without making reference to such information the office order dated 17.08.2004, Annexure-3 has been passed reducing the pension of the petitioner by 10%. Further submission is that Rule 139(c) of the Bihar Pension Rules Patna High Court CWJC No.12720 of 2005 (4) dt.09-05-2012 3/3 is not made out in the instant case as service record of the petitioner is absolutely satisfactory and that he has not been found guilty of any proven misconduct. I see substance in both the submission raised on behalf of the petitioner and accordingly, set aside the office order bearing Memo No.1785 dated 17.08.2004, Annexure-3 which proceeds only on the basis that petitioner failed to give information about his custody in the aforesaid case which is untrue in the light of Memo No.349 dated 7.12.1998. The order impugned does not refer to the unsatisfactory service record of the petitioner. The amount deducted pursuant to impugned order dated 17.08.2004 be refunded to the petitioner as early as possible, in any case within two months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order before the I.G., Registration, Bihar, Patna. 3. The writ application is, accordingly, disposed of. Rajesh/- (V.N. Sinha, J)

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.