Judgment:
CWP No.10266 of 2014 [1].IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.W.P.No.10266 of 2014 (O&M) Date of decision: 26.5.2014 Davinder Singh and another .Petitioners v.
The Secretary to Govt.
of Punjab and others .Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL Present: Mr.Swapan Shaorey, Advocate for the petitioneRs.Rajesh Bindal J.
The petitioners have approached this court impugning the order, vide which partially accepting the appeal filed by the petitioneRs.punishment has been reduced from forfeiture of two yeaRs.service to forfeiture of one year's service.
The allegation against the petitioners was that they had threatened one Amandeep Singh and took ` 500/- from him, who had come to visit Jalianwala Bagh, Amritsar along with his friends.
FIR No.29 dated 8.2.2012 was also registered against the petitioners under Section 284 IPC, at Police Station, Central Division, Amritsar.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners were not at all involved in the incident.
Even the complainant had stated so before the Enquiry Officer.
Still punishment of forfeiture of one year's service has been inflicted on them.
After hearing learned counsel for the petitioneRs.I do not find any merit in the submissions made.
On one hand, the petitioners are claiming that they were not involved in the incident and the complainant had stated so before the Enquiry Officer, on the other hand, the petitioners compromised the matter with the complainant and got the FIR registered against them quashed from this Court by filing Crl.
Misc.
No.M-15210 of 2012 vide order dated 22.8.2012.
Once the petitioners had admittedly Kumar Manoj 2014.05.28 09:18 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP No.10266 of 2014 [2].compromised the matter with the complainant for getting the FIR registered against them quashed, to deny their involvement in the case at this stage would be a totally contrary to what was pleaded in the quashing petition.
Considering the aforesaid facts and also the allegation against the petitioners that they had threatened Amandeep Singh, when he had come along with his friends to Jalianwala Bagh, Amritsar and took ` 500/- from him, in my opinion, the imposition of punishment of forfeiture of one year's service does not call for any interference by this court.
Dismissed.
(Rajesh Bindal) Judge 26.5.2014 mk Kumar Manoj 2014.05.28 09:18 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document