IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.1771 of 2002 Arun Kumar @ Arun Kumar Singh son of Shri Sheo Prasad Singh, resident of village- Khojagachhi, P.S.=Barbigha, District- Sheikhpura. Versus 1, The State of Bihar. 2. The Director General and I.G.Police, Bihar having his office at Old Secretaroat, Patna. 3. The D.I.G. Police, Magadh Range, Gaya. 4. The Superintendent of Police, Nawadah. 5. Sri Rajendra Singh, Police Inspector, Rajauli, P.S.- Rajauli, District- Nawadah. ----------- For the petitioner: Mr.Chitranjan Sinha, Sr.Advocate with Mr.Sidhartha Prasad Mr.Dineshwar Prasad Singh For the State: Mr.Lakmesh Marvind, J.C. to S.C.-20 3. 11.11.2008 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. By impugned order dated 31.10.1996 contained in anneuxure-4 the petitioner, a Constable in the police force at Nawadah has been dismissed from service on the charges which are enumerated in annexure-2. The charges disclose that he was under suspension for indiscipline, carelessness and causing injury by fire arm shot to his colleague, a police employee, for which he was arrested and sent to jail and that he was found involved in several criminal cases under serious offences of the year 1994, 1989 and 1986. It has been submitted that in all the four criminal cases the petitioner has been subsequently acquitted and, therefore, on account of such acquittal in criminal trial the petitioner must be taken back in service. This court is unable to accept this submission because on going through the charges it is found that the allegations constituting criminal offences were not the subject matter of the charges and the crux of the charges were - 2 - involvement of the petitioner as a police Constable in various criminal cases and also indiscipline, carelessness etc. on account of causing injury to his fellow police man. In such circumstance, it cannot be held that the departmental enquiry and criminal proceedings were based on identical and similar set of facts and evidence. Hence, the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of G.M.Tanak Vs. State of Gujarat and Anr., reported in A.I.R.2006 S.C.2129 is not applicable. The further submission that on the basis of such charges extreme penalty of dismissal should not have been awarded also does not find favour in a case of police Constable. It was not possible to retain the petitioner in police force once it is found that he is involved in criminal cases of substantial nature. In the circumstances, this court is not inclined to interfere with the impugned order. The writ petition is, therefore, dismissed. Md.S. (Shiva Kirti Singh,J.)