To,

The Dy. Inspector General of Police-cum-

Superintendent of Police,

Sonipat.

Subject:- Reply to the Show Cause Notice No. 797/Steno

dated 30.07.2018 issued to HC Dharambir Singh,
No. 390/SPT.

Respected Sir,

Most respectfully and humbly I beg to submit the

following submissions in response to above stated Show Cause

Notice for your kind consideration and taking favorable action:-

That your good self has served upon me the above

Show Cause Notice by satisfying with the finding report of the
enquiry officer wherein it has been proposed as to why punishment of
stoppage of two future annual increment with permanent effect may
not be inflicted upon me.

That a regular departmental enquiry is being

conducted against the applicant by your good self on the allegations
that while posted as MHC PS City, Sonipat one pass port verification
in respect of Sh. Rajender Singh S/o Sh. Lal Chand, resident of
Jatwara, Sonipat was received in the police station, but I did not
submit complete report according to the record of police station, City,
Sonipat as a result of which pass port could be prepared within
stipulated period.
 That the real fact of the case are that on receipt of
verification of pass port in respect of Sh. Rajender Singh S/o Sh. Lal
Chand, I asked to the A/MHC to check the record of police station
and to report about conviction/acquittal of Sh. Rajender Singh as I
was busy due to heavy rush of work as I had to send replies of 5/6
urgent references which were received from the higher authorities.
The A/MHC checked the record and submitted his report to me and I
routine I put my signature on the said report, but later on it came to
know that the A/MHC did not submit complete report pertaining to
his acquittal as a result of which the pass port could not be prepared
within stipulated period as such the present departmental enquiry
was ordered against the applicant.

That during enquiry proceedings your good self has

examined as many as 6 P.Ws in favor of the prosecution:- P.W. No. 1
and 2 are formal witness and they have simply stated about my
posting and service record. However, it has been deposed by the CRC
that there are 10 good entries against bad nil.

P.W. No. 3 Sh. Mukesh Kumar, HPS, Dy. Supdt. Of Police,

Headquarter, Sonipat.

This witness has simply stated that he had forwarded

the report of SHO PS City, Sonipat to the Superintendent of Police,
Sonipat for taking departmental action against the applicant.
However, on cross examine this witness has admitted that before
submitting report he did not record statement of any official including
the delinquent.

P.W. No. 4 Inspector Raj Pal Singh, SHO PS City Sonipt-

This witness has deposed about sending of report

against the applicant, however this witness has admitted that the
applicant had send pass port verification report to the higher
authorities within stipulated period. He has also admitted that prior
to submitting report he had not recorded the statement of the
applicant and had also not checked the record of police station before
sending report to the Dy. Supt of Police, Headquarter, Sonipat for
initiating disciplinary action.

P.W. No. 6 Sh. Rajender Singh, Complainant-

This witness has specifically deposed that he went to

the police station City, Sonipat in connection with his pass port
verification. On that day HC Dharambir Singh, MHC was busy in his
official work and he put his report relating to pass port verification,
but due to heavy rush of work the report relating to my acquittal in
the case could not be made due to some clerical error. He has further
deposed that earlier he had submitted complaint against the
applicant due to some misunderstanding and in hasty manner.
Further he has specifically deposed that earlier complaint submitted
by him may kindly be filed and action may be taken on the basis of
my present statement deposed before your good self. That on perusal
of his statement, your honor will please to see that no allegation of
corruption, misbehave, knowingly delay of any kind of misconduct
hae been proved. It is also pertinent to mention here that the
complainant has himself deposed before the enquiry officer that no
action may kindly be taken against the applicant hence, it is
requested that the applicant may very kindly be exonerated from the
vague and without weight charges.

P.W. No. 5 HC Surender Singh.

This witness is a formal witness and he has simply

stated about the report made by him.

That during the enquiry proceedings not an iota of

evidence came on record either to support of corroborate the above
allegation. However during the departmental enquiry it has been
proved beyond any reasonable doubt that the applicant has acted
within the frame work of rules and has noting in his mind bleakly to
help anyone. The allegations so called attributed to applicant were
only based upon figment of imagination what to talk of it except
gossiping and lack of any evidence while the law is very clear that in
the departmental enquiries the basis should be on some substantive
and definite evidence.

That the applicant is innocent from each and every

angle but is being made scapegoat on false and fabricated allegations
at he instance of some one. There were no false and fabricated
allegations at the instance of some one. There was no evidence worth
the name to sustain the charges frame. Thus awarding of any
punishment to the applicant will not only be violence of principal of
nature justice but also suffering from the vice of illegality and
arbitrariness.

That the allegations are quite false and proved beyond

reasonable doubt that such facts have been designed only to
hoodwink the reality and the truth into a state of grave obscurity and
uncertainty without any evidence on record only to support or
corroborate the fake/fictitious version of the complaint.

That the applicant is law abiding official who cannot

dare to disobey or disregarded the orders of the senior officers. The
work and conduct of the applicant had remained good and beyond
suspicious. The service record of the applicant is unblemished from
each and every corner. There are ten good entries in my character roll
against bad nil.

That the applicant is very poor fellow and ahs no

other source of income, I am the alone bread earner of my family. In
case any punishment is awarded to the applicant then my life career
shall be ruined badly. It is also submitted that since the date of my
appointment I, am performing my duty very honestly, efficiently and
with fully satisfaction to my seniors. I had always done exceptionally
and commendable work with great Zeal enthusiasm, industry and
fidelity. My work has been highly appreciated by the various officers
as well as the local administration from time to time. There is no
adverse remark in my service record throughout the entire service as
is evident from the statement of CRC, DPO, Sonipat.

It is pertinent to mention here that during the enquiry

proceedings no PW could prove the allegation leveled against me.

However some of the PWs are of formal nature and

they have simply stated about my posting and service record.

Keeping in view of the submission referred above your

honor will please to see that I am innocent in this cause. It is
therefore respectfully prayed that in the present case I, may very
kindly be exonerated and finding may kindly be submitted by
exonerating me fully from the charged level against me. I shall be
highly thankful to your good self for this act of kindness.

Yours faithfully,

(Dharambir Singh)
HC, No. 390/SPT
Now on IMSC
Madhuban (Karnal).
Confidential

From

Satender Kumar, IPS

Dy. Inspector General of Police-cum-

Superintendent of Police,

Sonipat.

To

The Inspector General of Police,

Rohtak Range, Rohtak.

No. /Steno dated Sonipat, the .07.2018.

Subject:- Representation against adverse remarks for the period from

18.08.2017 to 09.01.2018- HC Mohinder Singh, No. 10/SPT.

Memo.

Kindly refer to your office memo No. 2268/Steno dated 23.07. 2018,
on the subject noted above.

I have carefully gone through the representation of HC Mohinder

Singh, No. 10/SPT. The comments of the undersigned on the representation are
as under:-

It is submitted that the adverse remarks given in the Confidential

Report are not vague or arbitrary rather these are to the point as were warranted
by the format of the ACR form.

These adverse remarks were recorded in his ACR on the basis

of facts as his work was found unsatisfactory under the heads of ACRs in which
adverse remarks have been recorded. He was advised by the under signed from
time to time to mend his way but all in vain. The contentions raised by the
representationist that he was not awarded any punishment nor issued any notice
of such lapse or omission is baseless. The representationist while, posted at
Police lines, Sonipat, a regular departmental enquiry was initiated against him
vide this office order No. 61588-94 dated 28.12.2016, on the alleged allegation
that on19.03.2008 the defaulter, ASI Jai Bhagwan, No. 569/SPT (now Retd.), HC
Rajbir Singh, No. 1119/SPT, C-1 Sultan Singh, No. 351/SPT etc. were deployed
for producing 19 accused in the Court at Gohana in Govt. vehicle bearing No.
HR- 69-0809, which was driven by EHC Kuldeep, No. 1065/SPT. Accused
persons, after producing in the Court at Gohana, were being brought back to be
lodged in District Jail, Sonipat. On the way when the vehicle slowed down near
Shambu Dayal School, Gohana Road, Sonipat, due to speed breaker, one
accused namely Vikash @ Vikki jumped out of the moving vehicle after breaking
open the iron grill of the window and escaped from the police custody. It was
further alleged due to the negligency of the defaulters, accused Vikash escaped
from the police custody. In this respect a case FIR No. 67 dated 19.03.2008 u/s
223/224/225/120-B IPC PS City was registered and the defaulter, ASI Jai
Bhagwan, No. 569/SPT (now Retd.), HC Rajbir Singh, No. 1119/SPT & C-1
Sultan Singh, No. 351/SPT were arrested.

By this unlawful act, he has committed an act of gravest misconduct on his part.
Lateron the departmental enquiry was finalized and awarded punishment
stoppage of one future annual increment with temporary effect vide this office
order No. 210-177/Steno dated 06.03.2017. In this way he shown negligence and
dereliction in his official duty, being a member of disciplined police force, he was
judged dishonest, indisciplined & unreliable. He had failed to perform his duty
properly and the undersigned found no merit in the contentions raised by the
representationist.

The ACR is intended to be a mirror of the officer’s personality and it

is written with a view to improve the over-all performance of the officer. The ACR

ACR was not written only on the basis of departmental enquiry or any complaint

rather it is based on objective assessment of the work, conduct and personality of

the officer. From the facts and circumstances explained above it is well established

that the adverse remarks reflected in the ACR of the applicant are fully

justified and are on the basis of facts and figures which are clearly sustainable.

That the adverse remarks in the ACR of the representationist have

been recorded as per rules and instructions on the subject issued by the Govt.
from time to time and keeping in view of the overall working of the
representationist.

Adverse remarks recorded by the undersigned from 18.08.2017

to 31.03.2018 are not illegal, wrong and baseless. I fully stand by the above said
remarks. The comments of the undersigned are sent to your good-self for further
necessary action.

Encls. As above.

(Satender Kumar), IPS

Dy. Inspector General of Police-cum-

Superintendent of Police,

Sonipat.

To

The Director General of Police,

Haryana, Panchkula.

(Through Proper Channel)

Subject:- Application for forego promotion of P.A.

Respected Sir,

It is humbly requested that I have been promoted to the post of P.A.

vide your kind order No. 9289-99/E(II) -3 dated 05.07.2018. In this regard it
submitted that my children are studying in Sonipat and both eyes of my father have

been damage 90% due to old age. There is no other family persons who can look

after him. In view of my above domestic circumstances I am not In a position to avail

the benefit of my promotion as P.A.. It is therefore, respectfully prayed with folded

hands that my promotion may kindly be forego for one year please. I shall be highly

thankful to your good self for this act of kindness.

Your’s faithfully,

(Shiv Kumar), Steno

D.P.O., Sonipat.

A copy in advance is sent to W/Director General of Police, Haryana,

Panchkula for sympathetically consideration please.

Your’s faithfully,

(Shiv Kumar), Steno

D.P.O., Sonipat.
ORDER
 This order will dispose of a regular departmental enquiry
conducted against EASI Dalbir Singh, No. 722/SPT “here –in- after
shall be called as defaulter”.

A departmental enquiry was ordered against EASI Dalbir

Singh, No. 722/SPT, vide this office order No. 33963-68 dated
07.09.2017, on the allegation that while, he was posted in summon
staff, Sonipat, he was entrusted with a notice of criminal appeal titled
as “Krishan Versus Satpal” pending in the Court of Sh. Sushil
Kumar, the then Learned Additional Sess.

ion Judge, Sonipat, which was returnable on 17.04.2017 for effecting

service upon respondent Satpal, but he did not return the said
summons/notice in the Court. The Departmental enquiry was
conducted by Sh. Prithvi Singh, HPS, Dy. Supdt. of Police, City,
Sonipat. During the enquiry proceedings he was found innocent and
the enquiry officer submitted his finding report dated nil exonerating
from the charges leveled against EASI Dalbir Singh, No. 722/SPT. I
have gone through the departmental enquiry proceeding and finding
of the enquiry officer as well as contentions raised by the defaulter. I
agree with the finding report of Enquiry Officer. Therefore,
departmental enquiry against EASI Dalbir Singh, No. 722/SPT, is
hereby filed.

A copy of this order be supplied to EASI Dalbir Singh, No.

722/SPT, free of cost and order is booked accordingly.

(Satender Kumar), IPS

Dy. Inspector General of Police-cum-

Superintendent of Police,

Sonipat.
No. /Steno dated Sonipat, the .07.2018.

1. R/SP/OB along with D/E File Main files page 01 to 118, Misc file

page 01 to 40 and proceeding file page from 01 to 10.

2. CRC.

3. OASI with spare copy. One copy of the order may be delivered to

EASI Dalbir Singh, No. 722/SPT, under proper receipt.

4. EASI Dalbir Singh, No. 722/SPT.

ORDER

This order will dispose of a regular departmental enquiry

conducted against Inspector Parveen Kumar, No. RR/8, Inspector
Dhirender, No. F/34 and Inspector Devender Kumar, No. A/27 “here-
in –after shall be called as defaulter”.

A regular departmental enquiry was ordered against

Inspector Parveen Kumar, No. RR/8, Inspector Dhirender, No. F/34
and Inspector Devender Kumar, No. A/27 vide this office order No.
20167-72/Spl dated 18.11.2017, on the allegations that while they
were posted as SHO PS Kundli, Traffic Murthal and Ganaur they were
directed vide this office WAN/PTM No. 43679-710 dated 09.11.2017,
in order to avoid increase of air pollution in Delhi, heavy vehicles
were prohibited to enter in National Capital Delhi and in this regard
all the concerned SHOs of the police stations situated in the vicinity
of G.T. Road to personally ensure that heavy vehicles may not enter
in Delhi and to ensure that the traffic may be on smoother side on
National Highway No. 1, but despite that there was traffic jam on
National Highway- 1 and the public at large had to face difficulities
and the traffic was also interrupted due to such jam situation, which
could not be controlled by the defaulters while being posted as SHOs,
which were situated at National Highway- 1. By showing this gravest
misconduct and negligency for their part, a regular departmental
enquiry was conducted by Sh. Prithvi Singh, HPS, Dy.
Superintendent of Police, City, Sonipat.

The enquiry officer prepared summary of allegations, list of

PWs and copy of the relevant documents relied upon were served
upon to the defaulters by the prosecution and copies thereof were
supplied to the defaulters free of cost. The defaulters did not admit
the allegations leveled against them. The enquiry officer recorded the
statement of as many as seven PWs in the presence of defaulters and
he was given adequate opportunity to cross examine the PWs and
they also took notes of the statements of PWs.

-2-

After completion of the statements of PWs the enquiry

officer found a prima facie case has been made out against the
defaulters and as such prepared formal charges against the
defaulters. The formal charge got approved by the competent
authority. Copy of the same was also supplied to the defaulters free of
cost. The defaulters did not admit the charges leveled against them.
Sufficient time was given to the defaulters for submitting list of DWs.
They did not submit the name of any DW. The enquiry officer has
submitted his finding report dated 14.06.2018 by holding guilty of
the charge leveled against Inspector Parveen Kumar, No. RR/8,
Inspector Dhirender, No. F/34 and non guilty of the charge leveled
against Inspector Devender Kumar, No. A/27. On careful
consideration of the finding report, in particular of the conclusion
arrived at by the enquiry officer and evidence on record, I issued the
defaulter officials a show cause notice alongwith the copy of finding
report vide this office No. 658-79/Steno dated 22.06.2018, wherein, I
expressed my opinion as to why for this act of gravest misconduct on
their part a punishment of stoppage of two further annual increments
with permanent effect may not be inflicted upon them. They were
called upon to submit their reply within 15 days from the date of
receipt of this notice. They have submitted their written reply within
stipulated period. I have gone through the departmental enquiry
proceedings, finding of the enquiry officer and contentions raised by
the defaulters in response to the show cause notice as well as pleas
taken by the defaulter during the personal hearing on 13.07.2018,
they could not depose anything new in addition to their written
submissions. The pleas taken by the defaulter are found to be
baseless and without any merit. As per record available in the
departmental enquiry file it is crystal clear that they did not take any
interest in performing their duties.Upon this there was traffic jam
situation on National

-3-

Highway- 1 and the public at large had to face difficulities and the
traffic was also interrupted due to such jam situation, which could
not be controlled by the defaulters despiteof issuing directions to the
defaulters by the under signed. I am of the considered view that the
allegations leveled against them stand proved beyond shadow of
doubt. However, keeping in view of their service record and length of
service, I take a lenient view and a punishment of stoppage of “two
future annual increments with temporary effect” is hereby
awarded to Inspector Parveen Kumar, No. RR/8 and Inspector
Dhirender, No. F/34 for the above said lapse and departmental
enquiry against Inspector Devender Kumar, No. A/27 is hereby filed.
 A copy of this order be supplied to Inspector Parveen Kumar,
No. RR/8, Inspector Dhirender, No. F/34 and Inspector Devender
Kumar, No. A/27 free of cost and order be booked accordingly.

(Satender Kumar), IPS,

Dy. Inspector General of Police-cum-

Superintendent of Police,

Sonipat.

No. /Steno dated Sonipat, the .07.2018

1. R/SP/OB alongwith three D/E file page 01 to 122, misc. file 01

to 24 and proceeding file page 01 to 08.

2. CRC

3. OASI with spare copy one copy of the order may be delivered to

Insp. Parveen Kumar, No. RR/8, Insp. Dhriender, No. F/34 and

Insp. Devender Kumar, No. A/27 under proper receipt.

4. Inspector Parveen Kumar, No. RR/8.

5. Inspector Dhirender, No. F/34.

6. Inspector Devender Kumar, No. A/27

 ORDER

This order will dispose of a regular departmental enquiry

conducted against ASI Satbir Singh, No. 435/RR “here-in –after shall be
called as defaulter”.
 A regular departmental enquiry was ordered against ASI Satbir
Singh, No. 435/RR vide this office order No. 43257--61 dated 07.11.2017,
on the allegations, while he was posted at PP Khubrujhal (PS Ganaur), a
case FIR No.548 dated 09.10.2017 u/s 148,149,323,324,354,452,506 IPC
was registred in PS Ganaur and the investigation of the above said case
was conducted by the defaulter. After verifying the facts of this case by the
supervisory officer and SHO PS Ganaur the defaulter was directed to
complete the investigation expeditiously and fairly vide Zimini No. 1 and 1-
B dated 09.10.2017, but despite the direction of the above senior officer
the defaulter did not take any intrest in the investigation and in arresting
the accused up till 04.11.2017. By showing this gravest misconduct and
negligency for his part, a regular departmental enquiry was conducted by
Sh. Rajiv Deswal, HPS, Addl. Superintendent of Police, Sonipat.

The enquiry officer prepared summary of allegations, list of PWs

and copy of the relevant documents relied upon were served upon to the
defaulter by the prosecution and copies thereof were supplied to the
defaulter free of cost. The defaulter did not admit the allegations leveled
against him. The enquiry officer recorded the statement of as many as four
PWs in the presence of defaulter and he was given adequate opportunity to
cross examine the PWs and he also took notes of the statements of PWs.

After completion of the statements of PWs the enquiry officer

found a prima facie case has been made out against the defaulter and as
such prepared formal charges against the defaulter. The formal charge got
approved by the competent authority. Copy of the same was also supplied
to the defaulter free of cost. The defaulter did not admit the charges leveled
against him. Sufficient time was given to the defaulter for submitting list of
DWs. He did not submit the name of any DW. The enquiry officer has
submitted his finding report dated 07.06.2018 by

--2--

--2--
holding guilty of the charge leveled against him. On careful consideration
of the finding report, in particular of the conclusion arrived at by the
enquiry officer and evidence on record, I issued the defaulter official a
show cause notice alongwith the copy of finding report vide this office No.
657/Steno dated 14.06.2018, wherein, I expressed my opinion as to why
for this act of gravest misconduct on his part a punishment of stoppage of
two further annual increments with permanent effect may not be inflicted
upon him. He was called upon to submit his reply within 15 days from the
date of receipt of this notice. He has submitted his written reply within
stipulated period. I have gone through the departmental enquiry
proceedings, finding of the enquiry officer and contentions raised by the
defaulter in response to the show cause notice as well as pleas taken by
the defaulter during the personal hearing on 12.07.2018, he could not
depose anything new in addition to his written submissions. The pleas
taken by the defaulter are found to be baseless and without any merit. As
per record available in the departmental enquiry file it is crystal clear that he did not
take any interest in the investigation and for arresting the accused. I am of the

considered view that the allegations leveled against him stand proved
beyond shadow of doubt. However, keeping in view of his service record
and length of service, I take a lenient view and a punishment of stoppage of
“two future annual increments with temporary effect” is hereby
awarded to ASI Satbir Singh, No. 435/RR for the above said lapse.

A copy of this order be supplied to ASI Satbir Singh, No. 435/RR

free of cost and order be booked accordingly.

(Satender Kumar), IPS,

Dy. Inspector General of Police-cum-

Superintendent of Police,

Sonipat.

No. /Steno dated Sonipat, the .07.2018

1. R/SP/OB alongwith three D/E file page 01 to 64, misc. file 01 to

 12 and proceeding file page 01 to 20.

2. CRC

3. OASI with spare copy one copy of the order may be delivered to

ASI Satbir Singh, No. 435/RR under proper receipt.

4. ASI Satbir Singh, No. 435/RR.

ORDER

This order will dispose of a regular departmental enquiry conducted against

P/SI Pardeep Kumar “here-in –after shall be called as defaulter”.

A regular departmental enquiry was ordered against P/SI Pardeep Kumar

vide this office order No. 46083-87 dated 28.11.2017, on the allegations, while he was
posted at PP Rajlugarhi as Incharge, on 12.011.2017, where one Sunita w/o Satish
resident of village Rajlugarhi had got recorded complaint on women help line that
Kuldeep S/o Ramdhari and other two persons entered into her house and demanded Rs.
One lac and also threatened to kill her, but the defaulter did not take immediate action
on the relevant day as well as he did not visit the place of occurrence. Later on a case
FIR No. 614 dated 13.11.2017 u/s 387,458,506,34 IPC and 25-54-59 Arms Act PS
Ganaur was registered. In view of his above misconduct/negligence on his part a regular
departmental enquiry was conducted by Sh. Mukesh Kumar, HPS, Dy. Supdt. of Police,
Headquarter, Sonipat.

The enquiry officer prepared summary of allegation, list of PWs and copy of
the relevant documents relied upon were served upon the defaulter by the enquiry officer
and copies thereof were supplied to the defaulter free of cost. The defaulter did not admit
the allegations leveled against him. The enquiry officer recorded the statement of as
many as five PWs in the presence of defaulter and he was given adequate opportunity to
cross examine the PWs and he also took notes of the statements of PWs.

After completion of the statements of PWs the enquiry officer found a prima
facie case has been made out against the defaulter and as such prepared formal charges
against the defaulter. The formal charge got approved by competent authority. Copy of
the same was also supplied to the defaulter free of cost. The defaulter did not admit the
charges leveled against him. Sufficient time was given to the defaulter for submitting list

of DWs. He submitted the name of seven DWs. The enquiry officer recorded the
statement of as many as seven DWs in the presence of the defaulter. The enquiry officer
has submitted his finding report dated nil by holding guilty of the charge leveled against
him. On careful consideration of the finding report, in particular of the conclusion
arrived at by the

--2--

--2--

enquiry officer and evidence on record, I issued the delinquent official a show cause
notice alongwith the copy of finding report vide this office No. 702/Steno dated
02.07.2018, wherein I expressed my opinion as to why for this act of gravest misconduct
on his part a punishment of stoppage of two further annual increments with permanent
effect may not be inflicted upon him. He was called upon to submit his reply within 15
days from the date of receipt of this notice. He has submitted his written reply within
stipulated period. I have gone through the departmental enquiry proceedings, finding of
the enquiry officer and contentions raised by the defaulter in response to the show cause
notice as well as pleas taken by the delinquent during the personal hearing on
10.07.2018, he could not depose anything new in addition to his written submissions.
The pleas taken by the defaulter are baseless and without any merit. As per record
available in the departmental enquiry file it is crystal clear that he he did not visit the
place of occurrence on the complainant of Smt. Sunita w/o Sh. Satish resident of village
Rajlugarhi and he did not take prompt action. I am of the considered view that the
allegations leveled against him fully proved. Moreover, the nature of misconduct
committed by the defaulter is of serious nature and his escaping from the punishment
would have encouraged other to follow him Hence, a punishment of stoppage of “two
future annual increments with permanent effect” is hereby awarded to P/SI Pardeep
Kumar for the above said lapse.

A copy of this order be supplied to P/SI Pardeep Kumar free of cost and order be
booked accordingly.
 (Satender Kumar), IPS,

Dy. Inspector General of Police-cum-

Superintendent of Police,

Sonipat.

No. /Steno dated Sonipat, the .07.2018

1. R/SP/OB alongwith three D/E file page 01 to 76, misc. file 01 to 14

and proceeding file page 01 to 40.

2. CRC

3. OASI with spare copy. One copy of the order may be delivered to P/SI

Pardeep Kumar under proper receipt.

4. P/SI Pardeep Kumar.

To

The Inspector General of police,

Rohtak, Range, Rohtak.
(Through Proper Channel)
Subject:- Representation for the expunction of invalid adverse
remarks recorded in the ACR without any material on record andtotal
disregarded of the Rules for the period from 18.08.2017 to
31.03.2018, case of HC Mahinder Singh, No. 10/SPT, HC Rajbir
Singh, No. 1119/SPT and C-1 Sultan Singh, No. 351/SPT.
Respected Sir,
 Most respectfully and humbly we beg to submit the
following plausible submissions for your kind consideration and
taking favourable action sympathetically.
That the then Superintendent of Police, Sonipat has
recorded the following adverse remarks total disregarded of rules and
without any material on record for the period from 18.08.2017 to
31.03.2018, a copy of the adverse remarks is enclosed herewith.
Discipline - Indisciplined
General Remarks - Average
That the reporting authority in column No. 1 and 2 has
assessed the applicants as in-disciplined and average type officials.
The adverse remarks recorded in the ACR of the applicants are
baseless and not bonafide rather the same are based upon patent
error of the facts and have been recorded without appling his mind or
due to some misunderstanding at the instance of some one. The
reporting officer, while recording adverse remarks, has not taken into
consideration all over estimation of the applicants. In fact of face
reading of these adverse remarks recorded in the ACR, demonstrate
the intention of the reporting officer that he is inclined to spoil the
future career of the representationists by exercising his unbridled
powers without any material on record given an impression that
being the reporting officer he is above the rules of law. The adverse
remarks recorded is nothing but the highhandedness and colorable
exercise of the power to spoil the future career of the applicants with
mala fide who had performed their duties prior to this period and
during this period with honesty grate zeal, dedication and devotion to
our duty. There was no such complaint against the applicants either
in writing or verbally from any quarter. Thus the adverse remarks
recorded in the ACR based upon figment of imagination and lack of
any evidence what to talk of it except gossiping and as such suffers
from the vice of illegality and arbitrariness as the some have been
recorded in total disregarded of the rules i.e. instructions issued vide
letter No. 61/20.85/S[1] dated 12.12.1985 report regarding integrity,
memo no. 2/31/96-IHGI dated 01.06.1999 report regarding reliability
and other categories, memo no. 9026-GDI/6544 dated 04.12.1951
that the reporting authority while mentioning any defect in the report
should as for as possible also give indication of what efforts have
been made by way of guidance, admonition etc. to get defect removed
and with what result and in violation of the Hon’ble Apex Court
decision [1] 1996 [3] RSJ [SC]s that the competent authority should
share the information with the official before any adverse remarks is
made against them, such officer should show objectivity, impartiality
and fair assessment without any prejudice whatsoever and highest
sense of responsibility to inculcate in the officers devotion to duty
honesty and integrity so as to improve excellence of the individual
officer.
,223,224,34 IPC Police Station City, Soniapt and on the basis of
initiation of departmental enquiry which was conducted against the
applicants and other officials on the alleged allegations that on
19.03.2008 the applicants, along with ASI Jaibhagwan, No. 569/SPT,
ASI Ram Parshad, No.492/SPT, EASI Jaibhagwan, No. 1396/SPT,
EHC Angrej, EHC Shamsher, No. 1000/SPT, Ct. manoj, Ct. Satpal,
Ct. Charanji Lal etc were deployed for producing 19 accused in the
Court at Gohana in Govt. Vehicle bearing No. HR-69-0809 which was
driven by EHC Kuldeep. Accused persons, after producing in the
Court at Gohana, were being brought back to be lodged in district
Jail, Soniapt. On the way when the vehicle slowed down near
Shambu Dyal School, Gohana road, Sonipat, due to speed breaker,
one accused namely Vikash @ Vikki jumped out the moving vehicle
after breaking open the iron grill of the window and escaped from the
police custody. It was further alleged due to negligency of the
applicants, accused Vikash escaped from police custody. In this
respect case FIR No. 67 dated 19.03.2008 u/s 223,224,225,120-B
IPC was registered in police station City, Sonipat qnd the applicants
and ASI Jaibhagwan, No. 569/SPT were arrested. It was further
alleged that all the accused were under vigilance of the applicants
and ASI Jaibhagwan, No. 569/SPT.
That the real facts of the case are that the applicants and
other officials, as quoted above, were assigned the duty of producing
19 accused persons at Gohana Court and after producing the
accused when we were coming back in the above Govt. vehicle and
reached near Shambu Dyal School, Sonipat, the vehicle was slowed
down due to speed breaker and taking the benefit of the slow speed
one accused namely Vikash jumped out the moving vehicle by
breaking the iron grill window

It is further submitted that in the above departmental enquiry

punishment of stoppage on one further annual increment with
temporary effect was awarded. Against the above order the applicant
had filed the appeal to your good self and the same has been accepted
and reduced the punishment to that of warning only vide your office
order No. 7222-25/A-2 dated 04.07.2018, a copy of which is enclosed
herewith. Thus there is nothing adverse against the applicant hence,
the adverse remarks recorded may kindly be expunged.
 This fact stand proved beyond any responsible doubt as
discussed above in detail that (i) adverse remarks have been recorded in
total disregarded of rule (ii) adverse remarks recorded are not bonafied but
based on patent error of facts i.e. without any material on record. Thus taking
into consideration all the pros and cons as discussed above that the adverse
remarks have been recorded without any material on record or due to some
misunderstanding. Thus it is respectfully prayed with folded hands that the
adverse remarks recorded in the ACR of the applicant for the period from
18.08.2017 to 31.03.2018 may kindly be expunged in the interest of justice.

It is also requested that before taking any decision in the matter, the
applicant may very kindly also be afforded an chance of personal hearing so
that the real facts could be explained before your goodself. I shall be highly
thankful to your honour for this act of kindness.

Your faithfully,

(Sultan Singh)
C-1, No. 351/SPT
District- Sonipat

ORDER

This order will dispose of a regular departmental enquiry

conducted against EASI Dalbir Singh, No. 722/SPT “here –in- after
shall be called as defaulter”.
 A departmental enquiry was ordered against EASI Dalbir
Singh, No. 722/SPT, vide this office order No. 33963-68 dated
07.09.2017, on the allegation that while, he was posted in summon
staff, Sonipat, he was entrusted with a notice of criminal appeal titled
as “Krishan Versus Satpal” pending in the Court of Sh. Sushil
Kumar, the then Learned Additional Session Judge, Sonipat, which
was returnable on 17.04.2017 for effecting service upon respondent
Satpal, but he did not return the said summons/notice in the Court.
The Departmental enquiry was conducted by Sh. Prithvi Singh, HPS,
Dy. Supdt. of Police, City, Sonipat. During the enquiry proceedings he
was found innocent and the enquiry officer submitted his finding
report dated nil exonerating from the charges leveled against EASI
Dalbir Singh, No. 722/SPT. I have gone through the departmental
enquiry proceeding and finding of the enquiry officer as well as
contentions raised by the defaulter. I agree with the finding report of
Enquiry Officer. Therefore, departmental enquiry against EASI Dalbir
Singh, No. 722/SPT, is hereby filed.

A copy of this order be supplied to EASI Dalbir Singh, No.

722/SPT, free of cost and order is booked accordingly.

(Satender Kumar), IPS

Sr. Superintendent of Police,

Sonipat.

No. /Steno dated Sonipat, the .06.2018.

1. R/SP/OB along with D/E File Main files page 01 to 118, Misc
file page 01 to 40 and proceeding file page from 01 to 10.

2. CRC.

3. EASI Dalbir Singh, No. 722/SPT.

 ORDER

This order will dispose of a regular departmental enquiry

conducted against ESI/ASI Kuldeep Singh, No. 719/SPT “here-in –
after shall be called as defaulter”.

A regular departmental enquiry was ordered against

ESI/ASI Kuldeep Singh, No. 719/SPT vide this office order No. 5965-
68 dated 20.02.2018, on the allegations, while he was posted at PS
Murthal as Investigation Officer. He had appeared before the Hon’ble
Punjab and Haryana, High Court, Chandigarh in CRM-M No. 38538
of 2017, titled as Rajeev Ahuja versus State of Haryana, where a
prayer for grant of anticipatory bail was made under section 438
Cr.PC in FIR No. 326 dated 14.09.2017 under sections 376,328 read
with 34 of IPC PS Murthal, District Sonipat, which had come for
resumed hearing on 02.11.2017, before the Hon’ble High Court,
where the learned counsel for the State, on instructions from ESI/ASI
Kuldeep Singh (the investigation office of this case), submitted that
the male person in the first two photographs as annexed in
Annexure-P-6, is indeed the petitioner Rajeev Ahuja, thereby,
ESI/ASI Kuldeep Singh has clearly identified from the photographs to
be the photograph of the petitioner Rajeev Ahuja. However, on the
next date of hearing dated 12.01.2018, when the matter again came
for resumed hearing before the Hon,ble High Court, ESI/ASI Kuldeep
Singh, has clearly verified/recognized that the persons as reflected in
the photographs annexed as Annexure-P-6 is not of the petitioner
Rajeev Ahuja. By showing this gravest misconduct and negligency for
his part, a regular departmental enquiry was conducted by Sh. Rajiv
Deswal, HPS, Addl. Superintendent of Police, Sonipat.
 --2--

The enquiry officer prepared summary of allegations, list of

PWs and copy of the relevant documents relied upon were served
upon to the defaulter by the prosecution and copies thereof were
supplied to the defaulter free of cost. The defaulter did not admit the
allegations leveled against him. The enquiry officer recorded the
statement of as many as four PWs in the presence of defaulter and he
was given adequate opportunity to cross examine the PWs and he
also took notes of the statements of PWs.

After completion of the statements of PWs the enquiry

officer found a prima facie case has been made out against the
defaulter and as such prepared formal charges against the defaulter.
The formal charge got approved by the competent authority. Copy of
the same was also supplied to the defaulter free of cost. The defaulter
did not admit the charges leveled against him. Sufficient time was
given to the defaulter for submitting list of DWs. He did not submit
the name of any DW. The enquiry officer has submitted his finding
report dated 30.05.2018 by holding guilty of the charge leveled
against him. On careful consideration of the finding report, in
particular of the conclusion arrived at by the enquiry officer and
evidence on record, I issued the defaulter official a show cause notice
alongwith the copy of finding report vide this office No. 624/Steno
dated 02.06.2018, wherein, I expressed my opinion as to why for this
act of gravest misconduct on his part a punishment of stoppage of
two further annual increments with permanent effect may not be
inflicted upon him. He was called upon to submit his reply within 15
days from the date of receipt of this notice. He has submitted his
written reply within stipulated period. I have gone through the
departmental

--3—

enquiry proceedings, finding of the enquiry officer and contentions

raised by the defaulter in response to the show cause notice as well
as pleas taken by the defaulter during the personal hearing on
20.06.2018, he could not depose anything new in addition to his
written submissions. The pleas taken by the defaulter are found to be
baseless and without any merit. I am of the considered view that the
allegations leveled against him stand proved beyond shadow of doubt.
However, keeping in view of his service record and length of service, I
take a lenient view and a punishment of stoppage of “two annual
increments with temporary effect” is hereby awarded to ESI/ASI
Kuldeep Singh, No. 719/SPT for the above said lapse.

A copy of this order be supplied to ESI/ASI Kuldeep Singh,

No. 719/SPT free of cost and order be booked accordingly.

(Satender Kumar), IPS,

Dy. Inspector General of Police-cum-

Superintendent of Police,

Sonipat.

No. /Steno dated Sonipat, the .06.2018

1. R/SP/OB alongwith three D/E file page 01 to 54, misc. file 01 to

18

and proceeding file page 01 to 18.

2. CRC

3. OASI with spare copy. One copy of the order may be

delivered to ESI/ASI Kuldeep Singh, No. 719/SPT under

proper receipt.

4. ESI/ASI Kuldeep Singh, No. 719/SPT.