The Jaipur bench of the Rajasthan High Court affirmed the dismissal of a CRPF constable who deliberately remained absent from duty for 65 days beyond his approved leave without informing the authorities. Upon receiving a notice to rejoin duty, he responded with false information, claiming he had passed away.

Justice Anoop Kumar Dhand, in his order, said:

"This Court is of the considered opinion that a man in uniform must maintain greater discipline and the act of remaining unauthorizedly absent from duty is the gravest act of misconduct. Remaining absent from duty, after expiry of sanctioned leaves by a person, belonging to a disciplined force, is fatal".

The court observed that the petitioner's actions demonstrated a lack of "devotion" to duty. It emphasized that, as a member of a disciplined force, such indiscipline was "intolerable."

“Discipline is the hallmark of the disciplined forces and its member is not expected to violate the discipline by sending incorrect information with regard to his death, more particularly when the delinquent officer is alive and remains unauthorizedly absent from duty.”

The Court was hearing a petition filed by Satya Narayan Gurjar, challenging his dismissal from service for being absent from duty without sanctioned leave for 65 days.  

In his defense, the petitioner contended that after completing his sanctioned 15-day leave, he met with an accident and was undergoing treatment, which prevented him from rejoining duty. He further argued that, given his 15 years of service, the penalty of dismissal was disproportionate.

The State, however, contended that the petitioner failed to produce any satisfactory documentary evidence to substantiate his claims regarding the accident or medical treatment. Moreover, despite multiple notices, he neither provided any intimation about his treatment nor responded appropriately, instead falsely claiming his own death. It was only after warrants were issued against him that he rejoined service.  

After considering the arguments and reviewing the material on record, the Court held that as a uniformed member of a disciplined force, the petitioner’s prolonged absence, defiance of senior officers' orders, and fabrication of false information about his own death constituted gross misconduct.

“The record reveals that when the petitioner did not report on duty, after expiry of his sanctioned leaves, a notice was sent to him with direction to report on duty. In response to the said notice, an incorrect information was sent on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner has passed away. Thereafter, this fact was verified by the respondents, wherein he was found alive, hence, such an act of the petitioner tantamounts to indiscipline. The petitioner was a member of the disciplined force and he was supposed to act and behave in a disciplined manner. It is clear that the petitioner has disobeyed the orders of his Superior Officers and has deserted the force for a period of 65 days. Such desertion is an act of gross misconduct," the court added.

Accordingly, the petition was dismissed. Title: Satya Narayan v Union of India & Ors.