SI was not in charge of the police station on the day of the incident, so how was he punished – High Court

Jaipur. Rajasthan High Court has asked the state government as to why the petitioner SI was punished when he was not on duty as police station in-charge when he arrested the complainant and brought him to the police station. Along with this, the court has put a stay on the effect of the punishment given to the petitioner in the case. The court has given eight weeks time to the state government to submit its reply in the matter. A single bench of Justice Sudesh Bansal gave this order while hearing Begaram’s petition. In the petition, advocate Ramakant Gautam told the court that the petitioner was previously working as in-charge of Chaumu police station. Meanwhile, he handed over the charge of the post of in-charge to another policeman and left for departmental work. During this time, complainant Dinesh Kumar Jangid was arrested under section 151 of CrPC. Dinesh Kumar had complained about this to the department. Acting on which the department issued an order on October 30, 2021, withholding a salary increment of the petitioner. On a departmental appeal, the appellate officer issued an order on August 17, 2022, reducing the punishment to censure. Challenging this it was said that the petitioner does not deserve punishment. Because he is not responsible for the action taken at the police station on the day of the incident. The petitioner was not the police station in-charge that day. In such a situation, it is not appropriate to punish him. While hearing this, the single bench has put a stay on the effect of the punishment for blasphemy.