Site news

RULE 10 (1) (A) READ WITH RULE 10 (2) (A) (B) OF THE CCA RULES THE THASILDAR MUDHOL CANNOT BE “SUSPENDED” AS HE WAS NOT CAUGHT RED-HANDED BY ACB

 
 
Picture of System Administrator
RULE 10 (1) (A) READ WITH RULE 10 (2) (A) (B) OF THE CCA RULES THE THASILDAR MUDHOL CANNOT BE “SUSPENDED” AS HE WAS NOT CAUGHT RED-HANDED BY ACB
by System Administrator - Friday, 13 January 2017, 5:24 AM
 

By : M.S.Yatnatti: Editor and Video Journalist Bangalore : Reading Rule 10 (1) (a) read with Rule 10 (2) (a) (b)of the CCA Rules the thasildar Mudhol cannot be "suspended” as he was not caught red-handed by ACB and question of his deemed suspension cannot operate with Rule 10 (2) (a) (b)of the CCA Rules in isolation. The state Government cannot suspend the Tahsildar then DC Bagalkot cannot keep him without work under illegal suspension .ACB cannot punish innocents. Reportedly News papers have reported one side story as told by ACB Bagalkot. The false compliant and false FIR in crime number 03/2016 in ACB Police station Bagalkot and subsequent illegal arrest of Thasildar Mudhol District Bagalkot warrants action on ACB Police inspector Bagalkot and not on Suhas S IngaleThasildar Mudhol District Bagalkot as he is reportedly innocent and not committed any misconduct and irregularities as per KCSR and under section 10 (1) Karnataka Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1957 Suhas S IngaleThasildar Mudhol cannot be suspended as he was not caught red-handed by ACB . Rule 10 of the CCA Rules provides for placing a Government Servant under suspension. Under section 10. Suspension. (1) The Appointing Authority or any authority to which it is sub ordinate or any other authority empowered by the Government in this behalf may place a Government servant under suspension - [(a) "Where there is prima facie evidence to show that he was caught red handed while accepting gratification other than legal remuneration by the persons authorized to investigate under the provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 or under any other law;ACB and Deputy Commissioner and Assistant commissioner cannot exercised powers illegally, arbitrarily and discriminately giving a go-bye to all norms, guidelines and principles required to be scrupulously followed asmandated by law. The deputy commissioner Bagalkot need to read Rule 10 (1) (a) of the CCA Rules conjointly with Rule 10 (2) (a) (b) of the CCA Rules and when question of suspension itself does not arise in case without getting caught red handed while accepting gratification other than legal remuneration by the persons authorized to investigate under the provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 or under any other law then question of deemed suspension does not arise under with Rule 10 (2) (a) (b) of the CCA Rules.

The action of ACB Police inspector Bagalkot against Suhas S IngaleThasildar Mudhol District Bagalkot is illegal capricious without authority of law in reportedly and allegedly arresting himwithout any proper complaint as the complaint itself is scripted and fabricated by ACB itself stating that complainant is illiterate and complaint should have been signed by independent witness withcomplainant thumb impression but it is interesting to note that illiterate complainant has signedthe complaint in English ?. even in this scripted ACB complaint no crime is made out against Thasildar Mudhol as it mentions clearly that complainant file is not pending at the desk of Thasildar Mudhol but ACB makes him accused in False FIR . In scripted ACB complaint even evidence of bribe demand cannot be made out .Even then ACB police Inspector who mentions Abdul as attender in the office of the Thasildar does not make him accuse instead of thasildar but arrests him under fake trap or when the " trap " was failed because the officials accused in the FIRdid not touched the chemical money brought by complainant when trap tookplace and even Thasildarwas not in the location and ACB Inspector failed to get him trapped red handed and with evidence itself speaks volumes about fabricated complaint and fabricated and framed up FIR .The standard procedure for trap cases was not followed by ACB Police inspector Bagalkot also the pre-trap and the post trap procedures involved in the case not followed .ACB Inspector has violatedhuman rights of Thasildar and complainant has committed atrocity on him as Thasildar belongs to SC ST community by giving false complaint against him under section 3(1)ix of POA Act 1989 if anybodygives any false or frivolous information to any public servant and thereby causes such public servant to use his lawful power to the injury or annoyance of a member of a Scheduled Caste or a Scheduled Tribe.Reportedly and allegedly The ACB Police inspector scripted and fabricated false compliant and registered a false FIR in crime number 3/2016 dated 21-12-2016 on reportedly false complaint ofSri Shivalingappa Mantoor and arrested Thasildaron false trap as he could not be arrested red-handed but ACB Commits illegality by arresting a white handed Thasildar.ACB police has only power to institute cases by trap if ACB is successful in trapping otherwise by filing DA if they have proof against the officer of having assets disproportionate to his known sources of Income and ACB has no power to arrest white handed innocent Thasildar under Prevention of corruption Act .

When many of successful trap cases failed in court of law then question of failed trap or fake trap or false trap or entrapment of this kind winning the test of legal scrutiny of law is out of question. Sevral citations of high court and Supreme Court are cited in this regard are attached with this letter for your perusal.When the trap laid by The ACB Police inspector against Thasildar and another accused was failed and Thsildar did not touch the money brought by the complainant Sri Shivalingappa Mantoor and without any independent witness and conducting mahazar and after failed trap on Thasildar police did not had any power to arrest white handed Thsildar wherefore the action of ACB Police inspector Bagalkot is illegal capricious without authority of law in arresting him without any proof of evidence of bribe demand or when the " trap " was failed and money brought by complainant was not touched by him and when trap took he was not in the location and ACB Inspector failed get him arrested red handed .The standard procedure for trap cases was not followed by ACB and also the pre-trap and the post trap procedures involved in the case not followed .

Reportedly and allegedly ACB Inspector has violated hishuman rights and complainant has committed atrocity on himas he belong to SC ST community by giving false complaint against him under section 3(1)ix of POA Act 1989 if anybodygives any false or frivolous information to any public servant and thereby causes such public servant to use his lawful power to the injury or annoyance of a member of a Scheduled Caste or a Scheduled Tribe.

In view of this principal secretary revenue department cannot initiate departmental enquiry against him as he have not committed any irregularity or violated any section of law and being honest officer of the department have no history of cases against him and reportedly is innocent. And according to citations of Apex court in P.R.Nayak Vs Union of India suspension pending enquiry cannot be ordered before starting departmental enquiry.

Reportedly he is initiating separate compliant against ACB Police inspector Bagalkot in Karnataka state human rights commission and filing separate compliant against ACB Police inspector Bagalkot before ADGP ACB Bangalore and initiating separate compliant against Sri Shivalingappa Mantoor under POA Act for filing false case on him .Reportedly Thasildar isrequesting the Government of Karnataka to withdraw this false case from prosecution under 321 (a) of criminal procedure code and heshall file Writ Petition In Karnataka high court to quash this false FIR under 482 criminal procedure code.

Suhas S IngaleThasildar Mudhol District Bagalkot as he is reportedly innocent and not committed any misconduct and irregularities as per KCSR and under section 10 (1) Karnataka Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1957 Suhas S IngaleThasildar Mudhol cannot be suspended as he was not caught red-handed by ACB . Rule 10 of the CCA Rules provides for placing a Government Servant under suspension .Under section 10. Suspension. (1) The Appointing Authority or any authority to which it is sub ordinate or any other authority empowered by the Government in this behalf may place a Government servant under suspension - [(a) "Where there is prima facie evidence to show that he was caught red handed while accepting gratification other than legal remuneration by the persons authorised to investigate under the provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 or under any other law;

Request is made to DC Bagalkot and AC Bagalkot to allow him to work until government take any action on him as Thasildar Mudhol honestly to department and public without fear and favour as he has not been suspended despite DC incomplete report to principal secretary and Thasildar is honest and innocent and dragged illegally into a false trap case and fake complaint and fake trap case without authority of law. I request ADGP ACB to investigate the matter and take necessary action on ACB Police inspector Bagalkot as per law for fabricating a false complaint and false FIR and arresting a white handed Thasildar.