IKRAMUDDIN RAJPUT vs INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, SINDH Departmental inquiry

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

IKRAMUDDIN RAJPUT VS INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, SINDH Departmental inquiry---Object and purpose---Standard of proof---Object of a departmental inquiry is to investigate allegations of misconduct in order to maintain discipline, decorum, and efficiency within the institution, and strengthening and preserving public confidence---In a departmental enquiry, the standard of proof is that of balance of probabilities or preponderance of evidence but not proof beyond reasonable doubt, which is a strict standard required in a criminal trial, where the potential penalties are severe. Citation Name: 2024 PLC(CS) 493 SUPREME-COURTBookmark this Case IKRAMUDDIN RAJPUT VS INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, SINDH S. 4(b)(v)---Police official---Allegation of unfair and dishonest investigation in a rape case involving a minor girl---Dismissal from service---According to the statement of allegations, the Medico-Legal Report declared that the hymen of the victim was freshly torn and bleeding, the chemical analysis report confirmed the presence of human sperm in the vaginal swab and shalwar of the victim---In the disciplinary proceedings, the competent authority concluded that there was no justification for the petitioner (police official) to insert section 511, P.P.C. based solely on the statement of a seven-year-old minor girl, recorded under section 164, Cr.P.C., while ignoring the ocular testimony of the victim's father who caught the accused with the help of neighbors committing the act of rape and handed him over to the police---Even the victim in her recorded statement under section 164, Cr.P.C. did not absolve the accused but the petitioner prematurely added section 511, P.P.C to provide advantage to the accused during his prosecution---Police force is a disciplined force with significant accountability and the responsibility of maintaining law and public order in the society---Therefore, any person who wants to be part of the disciplined force should be a person of utmost integrity and uprightness with an unimpeachable, spotless character, and clean antecedents---In the case in hand, disciplinary action was taken against the petitioner after complying with due process of law and on the basis of self-evident and self-explanatory documents---Enquiry officer, rightly found the petitioner guilty in his report for further necessary action---Dismissal from service order passed against the petitioner was maintained---Petition was dismissed and leave was refused.

IKRAMUDDIN RAJPUT vs INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, SINDH Departmental inquiry — 2024 PLC(CS) 493 SUPREME-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2024 PLC