The Delhi High Court has upheld the dismissal of a CRPF constable from service for consuming liquor during duty hours and misbehaving with another personnel by pointing a loaded gun at him while being in an inebriated state, saying his misconduct left no scope for leniency.
The constable told the court that he had an unblemished service record of 14 years and consumed liquor after his causal leave to attend to his ailing wife was denied and the dismissal order was arbitrary.
A bench headed by Justice Suresh Kumar Kait, however, said an officer cannot be permitted to rebel against the decisions of the competent authority and his stand was an admission that he was unable to handle stress, which is least expected from an officer of the force.
“It is not only the medical condition wherein petitioner is found heavily drunk, the situation worsened with petitioner’s pointing loaded carbine to another officer of the force, which is a blunder on his part. The misconduct committed by the petitioner leaves no scope for leniency towards him,” the bench, also comprising Justice Neena Bansal Krishna, opined in its order passed on May 4.
“The officer of a force cannot be permitted to rebel against the decisions of the competent authority and is expected to deal with it with patience and mind. By pleading that since petitioner’s leave was rejected, under tension and depression, he consumed liquor, petitioner has admitted before this court that he is unable to handle the strain or stress, which is least expected from an officer of the force and so, he had consumed liquor,” it said.
The authorities told the court that in October 2008, the petitioner was found to have consumed high dose of liquor, and cooked meat packed in a tiffin brought by an unidentified civilian was found with him.
Also Read
Subsequently, during his period of “confinement to line”, he again consumed liquor and unauthorisedly took out a loaded carbine with magazine and pointed at another personnel.
The court was informed that a disciplinary inquiry was initiated after this incident and the authority held that the petitioner was not fit for serving in the force, and that for maintaining good discipline and morale of the force, it was necessary to dismiss him from service.
The court noted that the petitioner was found intoxicated on more than one occasions and the charges levelled against him were proved beyond reasonable doubt and rejected his petition.
It said it was in agreement with the counsel for the authorities that a member of the force is expected to be highly disciplined and cannot be permitted to get away with such activities.
