Amrendra Kumar vs Union Of India And Ors

Manmohan, J

The hearing has been done by way of video conferencing.

Present writ petition has been filed challenging the orders dated 20th March, 2020, 11th October, 2019, 16th January 2019, 19th July 2018, 10th April, 2018, the enquiry officer's report dated 17th March, 2018, brief submitted by the Presiding Officer dated 24th Feb, 2018 and charge sheet dated 10th October, 2017. Petitioner also seeks a direction to the Respondents to reinstate the Petitioner with all consequential benefits.

Learned Counsel for the Petitioner states that the Petitioner a Constable/GD with the CRPF has been compulsorily retired from service with only 67% compensation for both pension and gratuity. She states that the Petitioner shared the alleged defamatory WhatsApp images and message with his DIG (Operations) CRPF, Jagdalpur only with the intent of informing the authorities and not with the intent of defaming AC Nand Lal Meena. She states that the Petitioner did not know AC Nand Lal Meena at all, thus, there was no motive for the Petitioner to defame him. She states that a perusal of the conversation between the Petitioner and the DIG (Operations) CRPF, Jagdalpur will clearly show that it was in fact DIG (Operations) CRPF, Jagdalpur who had asked the Petitioner to further investigate the issue and find out as to where the photograph was clicked and on what date. She submits that the punishment of compulsory retirement is clearly disproportionate to the facts and circumstances of the present case.

Having perused the paper book, this Court finds that the petitioner had shared the same WhatsApp message with about two hundred CRPF staff members on a group chat of which he was the Administrator wherein it was stated that the "B/80 company commander Ac shree Nandlal meena call girl k sath hotel ka photo (Raipur)". Though the photographs in question could not be uploaded as the signal available was not of adequate strength, yet it was only after the said message had been forwarded to two hundred staff members of the CRPF that it was shared by the petitioner with the DIG (Operations) CRPF, Jagdalpur. Consequently, the petitioner's primary contention that he had shared the message with the superior authorities with the intent of informing them rather than with the intent of defaming AC Nandlal Meena is contrary to facts.

In fact, this Court is of the view that the petitioner with intent of lowering the name, image and reputation of AC Nandlal Meena, without any verification and without asking the authorities prior in time to investigate the authenticity of the same, had circulated the WhatsApp message to about two hundred CRPF staff members.

Accordingly, the present writ petition along with pending application being bereft of merit is dismissed.

The order be uploaded on the website forthwith. Copy of the order be also forwarded to the learned counsel through e-mail.