IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.4255 of 2009 DINESH SINGH, SON OF SRI RAM JIVAN SINGH, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE MANAN BIGHA, P.O. SARTA, P.S. PARAS BIGHA, DISTRICT JEHANABAD. ---- PETITIONER Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH THE CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, OLD SECRETARIAT, PATNA. 2. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, BIHAR, PATNA. 3. THE INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, BIHAR, PATNA. 4. THE DEPUTY INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, SAHABAD RANGE, DEHRI-ON-SONE. 5. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, BHOJPUR AT ARA. 6. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, SUPAUL. ---- RESPONDENTS ----------- 2 5.5.2010 This application has come up for second time for quashing of the order passed by the Superintendent of Police, Bhojpur at Ara dated 6.11.2008 which has been passed on a direction of this Court by order dated 31.7.2008 whereby the Superintendent of Police, Bhojpur at Ara had to consider the reply to the second show cause filed by the petitioner and pass a final order. The facts are that the Superintendent of Police, Bhojpur at Ara by annexure-9 had considered the second show cause filed by the petitioner and had rejected the contentions raised on behalf of the petitioner. The said appellate order dated 30th of August, 2003 was sent to the Superintendent of Police, Supaul for communication to the petitioner as the petitioner is now posted at Supaul. The petitioner came to this Court and the matter was remanded back to the Superintendent of Police, Bhojpur at Ara. The main contentions of the petitioner are that the documents with respect to which the charges were framed were not supplied to the petitioner, the witnesses were not examined in presence of the petitioner, the petitioner did not get an opportunity to cross examine the witness which have been produced to substantiate 2 the allegations against the petitioner. On perusal of the order dated 30th of August, 2003, it appears that these aspects have not been considered by the Superintendent of Police, Bhojpur at Ara much less have they been considered in the impugned order dated 6.11.2008 which has been disposed of in two lines stating that the Superintendent of Police, Bhojpur at Ara has examined the documents and the evidence in the proceeding and finds that no grounds are made out for recalling the order dismissing the petitioner from service. An appeal has also been filed against the order of the Superintendent of Police, Bhojpur at Ara on 26.2.2009 which has been disposed of on 26.2.2009 rejecting the claim of the petitioner. The questions raised by the petitioner goes to the core of the entire matter. I, thus, remand the matter back to the Superintendent of Police, Bhojpur at Ara to examine his earlier order dated 30th of August, 2003 viz a viz the submissions raised by the petitioner that (a) the relevant documents were not supplied to the petitioner (b) the petitioner was not given an opportunity to cross examine the witnesses produced on behalf of the State to prove charges against the petitioner. If the Superintendent of Police, Bhojpur at Ara on examination of the records of the departmental proceedings finds that these facts are correct, it would be proper for the Superintendent of Police, Bhojpur at Ara to order a fresh proceeding against the petitioner. In case the Superintendent of Police, Bhojpur at Ara finds from the records that the procedure was 3 in accordance with law then he may pass an appropriate order with respect to the two questions raised and pointed out by this Court. The entire procedure should be considered and disposed of by the Superintendent of Police, Bhojpur at Ara within a period of three months on receipt/production of a copy of this order. The petitioner is granted leave to appear in person before the Superintendent of Police, Bhojpur at Ara or be represented through a counsel. The orders impugned contained in annexures 16 and 18 dated 6.11.2008 and 26.2.2009 are quashed. This application is allowed. Sanjay (Sheema Ali Khan, J.)