Punjab and Haryana High Court for re-look at police rules after noticing anomaly

Saurabh Malik

Chandigarh, January 28

Ninety years after the Punjab Police Rules came into being, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has called for its re-examination after noticing hierarchical anomaly in carrying out disciplinary proceedings. The Bench asserted that the IGP was considered the highest authority for all disciplinary and punishment purposes, but at present the DGP was the highest authority.

Justice Jagmohan Bansal asserted that the courts could neither legislate, nor ask the legislature to do the same in a particular manner. But the courts from experience gained while dealing with the same set of cases could suggest.

Accordingly, the state in light of the prevailing situation suggested to re-examine chapter XVI on punishment of the Punjab Police Rules, 1934. Elaborating, Justice Bansal asserted that no post above the IGP’s rank had been noticed in the chapter.

For all disciplinary and punishment purposes, IGP had been considered the highest authority, whereas at present the DGP was the highest authority. The police officers were filing revision-cum-mercy petition before the DGP after the dismissal of appeal by the IGP.

Referring to rules 16.32 of the rules, Justice Bansal asserted that the revision did not lie against the IGP’s order. An aggrieved person might submit mercy or review petition before the same authority, the IGP. Another rule, 16.28, made it clear that an IG/DIG/SSP could review his subordinate’s orders. But the power of review was not bestowed on officers senior to the IG.

“Normally, the power of review is conferred upon the same authority, whereas under rule 16.28, the power of review has been conferred upon an officer senior to the officer passing the order. The rule is silent about review of an appellate order, thus, the police authorities are reviewing even the appellate orders. This aspect needs to be clarified,” Justice Bansal asserted.

He said that the authorities were supposed to re-consider department punishment if the criminal proceedings were dropped. The Bench was hearing a petition filed by a police official seeking the setting aside of an order dated March 15, 2021, whereby Punjab DGP ordered his dismissal from service.

Allowing the plea, the Bench added that it was quite evident that the power of review under rule 16.28 had been conferred upon the IGP/ DIG/SSP, whereas the impugned order was passed by the DGP.