Jafir Ansari @ Md. Jafir Ansari vs The State Of Bihar & Ors.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents.

The petitioner has filed the instant application for the following reliefs.

The case of the petitioner in brief is that an FIR was lodged against the petitioner being Dumraon P.S. Case No. 16 of 2022 on the charge that the petitioner on 14.5.2022 was abusing the lady constables in front of the ladies barrack in a drunken state. The petitioner was placed under suspension on 17.5.2022. A show cause notice was served on the petitioner on 21.5.2022 to which he filed his reply on 23.5.2022, denying the charges and requesting that he be relieved from suspension. The petitioner was relieved from suspension on 26.5.2022 with effect from 25.5.2022.

A departmental proceeding was started against the petitioner with framing of charge on 18.7.2022, the charge being of the petitioner having abused the lady constables in front of the ladies barrack in a drunken state for which an FIR being Dumraon P.S. Case No. 16 of 2022 was registered against him under section 37 of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016. In the enquiry conducted, the Enquiry Officer submitted an enquiry report on 23.5.2023 finding the charge leveled against the petitioner to have been proved.

The petitioner was served with a copy of the enquiry report. By order dated 29.5.2023 a show cause notice was issued by the Commandant, BSAP-4, Dumraon, Buxar asking the petitioner to submit his reply as to why he be not dismissed from service. The petitioner submitted his reply to the show cause notice denying the charges. The Commandant, BSAP-4, Dumraon, Buxar passed order dated 16.6.2023 dismissing the petitioner from service. The petitioner filed an appeal before the DIG of Police, BSAP, Central Zone, Patna. However, the appeal was dismissed by order dated 12.10.2023. The petitioner thereafter filed a memorial before the Director General of Police, Bihar. The memorial was also rejected by order dated 24.9.2024.

By way of the instant writ application, the petitioner has challenged the order of his dismissal dated 16.6.2023, the order rejecting his appeal dated 12.10.2023 as also the order rejecting his memorial dated 24.9.2024.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the charge leveled against the petitioner of having abused in a drunken state is false and incorrect as at the relevant time the petitioner was talking to his wife on his mobile phone with respect to the preparation of the marriage of their daughter. No witness has given a statement of having seen the petitioner either carrying liquor nor to the effect that they saw the petitioner consuming liquor. It is further submitted that the petitioner is under treatment of a Homeopathic doctor for a tumor in his right hand and it is as a result of some Homeopathic medicine that the quantum of alcohol to the tune of 0.04 percent was found. In any case, the same is a negligible quantity. Learned counsel submits that neither the blood nor the urine of the petitioner were sent for chemical analysis to any Forensic Science Laboratory and the respondents are trying to base their case only on the basis of the Breath Analyzer report. Referring to the letter dated 25.5.2022 of the Police Department itself, it is submitted that by the said letter, the DIG, Personnel, Bihar, has written to the police authorities including all the Superintendent of Police that it has been found by the Police headquarters that in conduct of the departmental proceedings various flaws or shortcomings were being found. By way of example, 32 circumstances have been mentioned in the said order, which at serial no. 22 includes accepting the charge to have been proved solely on the basis of the Breath Analyzer report. Further reliance has been placed by learned counsel for the petitioner on the judgments of this Court including the judgment dated 9.7.2026 passed in LPA No. 54 of 2025 (State of Bihar and others versus Dhananjay Singh), order dated 24.9.2024 passed in CWJC No. 3019 of 2022 (Nand Kishore Murmu versus State of Bihar & Ors.) as also the judgment dated 8.4.2025 passed in CWJC No. 3540 of 2023 (Jitendra Kumar versus State of Bihar and others). It is thus submitted that in view of the facts and circumstances of the case, the order of punishment as also the orders passed rejecting the appeal and memorial preferred by the petitioner are all unsustainable, all the three be set aside and the writ application be allowed.

The application is opposed by learned counsel for the respondents. Referring to the counter affidavit filed, it is submitted that an FIR was registered on 14.5.2022 against the petitioner who was posted as a Hawaldar at Bihar State Armed Police-4 (BSAP-4) under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016, on the charge of having abused the lady constables in front of the ladies barrack in a drunken state. The petitioner, in his statement before the Special Judge, Excise on 15.5.2022, accepted that he had consumed liquor, was found guilty and sentenced to payment of fine of Rs.2,000/. He accepted the fine and deposited the amount of Rs.2,000/ in the nazarat vide receipt no.342719 dated 15.5.2022 and was released from custody. It was further submitted by learned counsel for the respondents that a proceeding was started against the petitioner wherein the witnesses were examined and the petitioner who participated in the proceeding was given opportunity to cross-examine them. In the enquiry report submitted, the Enquiry Officer found the charge levelled against the petitioner to have been proved. A second show cause notice was issued to the petitioner to which he replied.

After considering the materials on record, the order of punishment dated 16.6.2023 was passed by the Disciplinary Authority dismissing the petitioner from service. The appeal and the memorial preferred by the petitioner were also rejected by reasoned orders. It was submitted that the petitioner not having been able to show any procedural irregularity in conduct of the proceeding, there is no merit in the writ application and the same be dismissed.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the materials on record.

The relevant facts in brief are that an FIR came to be registered against the petitioner being Dumraon P.S. Case no. 16 of 2022 on 14.5.2022 under section 37 of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 on the charge of the petitioner having abused the lady constables in front of the ladies barrack in a drunken state. The petitioner was taken into custody.

It further transpires from the material on record that on 15.5.2022 the petitioner accepted before the learned Special Judge, Excise the allegation of having consumed liquor on 14.5.2022. He was imposed with the sentence of payment of Rs.2,000/ which he deposited in the nazarat vide receipt no. 342719 dated 15.5.2022. It may be mentioned here itself that these facts have not been denied by the petitioner.

In the departmental proceeding the petitioner was served with the memo of charge on 18.7.2022, the charge being of the petitioner having abused lady constables in front of ladies barrack in a drunken state leading to lodging of Dumraon P.S. Case no. 16 of 2022 dated 14.5.2022 under section 37 of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016. The petitioner filed his reply and after conduct of the enquiry, the Enquiry Officer submitted his report on 23.5.2023 (Annexure-6), finding the charges leveled against the petitioner to have been proved.

A perusal of the enquiry report would show that a number of witnesses including Md. Ali Ansari (Dy.S.P.), Raju Ranjan Kumar (Dy.S.P.), Chandeshwar Ram (Inspector), Dadan Ram (Sub-Inspector), Bindeshwar Ram (Inspector) and Birendra Ram (Sub-Divisional Medical Officer, Dumraon) were all examined in support of the charges leveled against the petitioner. In their statement, they have supported the allegations of the petitioner hurling abuses at the lady constables in an intoxicated state in front of the ladies barrack. The lady constables were in an agitated state. Some of these persons on being called at the place of occurrence, they found the petitioner to be in an intoxicated state and thereafter of controlling the agitation of the lady constables. They also stated about the F.I.R. being registered, the petitioner being taken to the hospital where he was examined under a Breath Analyzer and was found to have consumed alcohol. A perusal of the enquiry report would show that the Enquiry Officer has relied upon and referred to six witnesses and eight documents in coming to the finding that the charges against the petitioner were proved. The petitioner was given opportunity to cross-examine the witnesses. On the submission of the enquiry report, the petitioner was served with the second show cause notice to which he replied and taking into consideration the petitioner's reply, the order of punishment was passed.

So far as the reliance placed by learned counsel for the petitioner on the circulars of the respondents and different judgments of this Court that the petitioner could not have been found guilty of the charges solely on the basis of the Breath Analyzer test report, in the opinion of the Court, the same is of no assistance to the petitioner in the facts of the instant case. So far as the Breath Analyzer test report is concerned, the only purpose of the same is to confirm/prove as to whether the petitioner was in an intoxicated state at the relevant time when the occurrence is said to have taken place. As stated above, on the very next date, the petitioner himself before the Special Judge, Excise accepted to have consumed liquor on 14.5.2022, was found guilty, sentenced to payment of Rs.2,000 and he paid the said amount by depositing the same in the nazarat vide receipt no.342719 dated 15.5.2022. Further, so far as the presence of the petitioner at the place of occurrence and his conduct is concerned, the same has also been proved by the witnesses examined in course of the inquiry.

In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, the petitioner has not been able to point out any procedural irregularity in the conduct of the proceedings. So far as the order passed in the appeal and memorial filed by the petitioner is concerned, this Court finds that the orders have been passed by the respondent authorities taking into consideration the relevant material on record and are supported by reasons as stated therein.

In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, the Court finds no merit in the instant writ application.

The writ application is dismissed.