Cart is empty 
Facts of the Case
The appellant, a Rifleman in the Assam Rifles, was suspended following two charges: firing at a colleague and leaving his post without authorization. Arrested and tried, he was found guilty and sentenced to three years’ imprisonment and dismissal from service on March 23, 2018. His appeal was rejected due to delays and lack of merit. A writ petition challenging the dismissal was dismissed by the learned Single Judge on March 5, 2024, for lacking merit.
Contention of the Petitioner
The petitioner argued that the punishment was excessively harsh given the circumstances, asserting that delays in his appeal were due to Covid-19. He also claimed procedural irregularities in the trial and highlighted his unemployment post-dismissal.
Contention of the Respondent
The respondent contended that the trial followed due process, with the appellant having been found guilty based on substantial evidence. They argued that reinstating him could jeopardize other personnel’s safety due to his proven misconduct and existing criminal charges.
Court’s Observation
The court noted the appellant’s conviction and previous disciplinary issues. It found no procedural lapses in the trial and emphasized that the appellant’s claim of insanity was raised only at the appellate stage, making it inappropriate for consideration. The court referred to Section 121 of the Assam Rifles Act regarding procedural lapses for individuals with mental health issues but found the appellant’s claims of lunacy unsubstantiated and dangerous.
The judge remarked, “Even if it is taken that the appellant is a lunatic, reinstating an employee with an unsound mind in a disciplined force is dangerous not only to the Force, but also to the society at large.”
Court’s Decision
The court upheld the dismissal, finding that the decision was lawful, and the learned Single Judge’s order was valid. Reinstatement was deemed inappropriate given the severity of the misconduct and potential threat to safety due to Appellant’s mental health issues.