Aqib Khalid v. Inspector General of Police & others

Background

The appellant was a police constable on a recruitment course at the Shaheed Benazir Bhutto Elite Police Training Centre, Razzaqabad, Karachi. In December 2017 he was arrested in a criminal case under the Control of Narcotic Substances Act. On the Commandant's recommendation, the SP Headquarters, West Zone, discharged him from service by order dated 05.01.2018 under Rule 12.21 of the Police Rules, 1934.

His departmental appeal was "filed" (not entertained) by order dated 15.02.2019, on the basis that no appeal lies against a discharge under Rule 12.21. On 05.09.2023 he was acquitted by the Additional Sessions Judge-I / Model Criminal Trial Court, Karachi West. On 12.09.2023 he filed a fresh departmental appeal to the Inspector General of Police. When it was not decided within 90 days, he filed a service appeal on 05.01.2024.

Issues before the Tribunal

• Is an appeal maintainable against a discharge under Rule 12.21, which itself says there is no appeal?
• Was the appeal within time?
• Could the discharge stand after the acquittal?

The Tribunal's reasoning

Maintainability. Rule 12.21 states that there is no appeal against a discharge under it. The Tribunal relied on Government of Sindh v. Muhammad Hussain (2002 SCMR 75), where the Supreme Court held that police officers, as civil servants, are governed by the Civil Servants Act, 1973, and a similar bar in the Police Rules cannot override their statutory right of departmental appeal. The Tribunal had followed that view in an earlier case, so the service appeal was maintainable.

Limitation. Applying Muhammad Zameer v. D.I.G. Police (2010 PLC (C.S.) 1165), the acquittal gave a fresh cause of action. The fresh departmental appeal was filed within a month of acquittal, so the service appeal was treated as maintainable and within time.

Merits. The written statements did not show that any inquiry had been held. The department's only material was the criminal case, which ended in acquittal. Under Rule 16.3(1) of the Police Rules, 1934, an officer acquitted of a criminal charge is not to be punished departmentally on the same charge unless one of the exception clauses applies. The State did not point to any.

Outcome

The appeal was allowed. The original and appellate orders were set aside and the appellant was reinstated with back benefits. His out-of-service period is to be treated as leave of the kind due.

Why it matters

Recruits and probationers are often discharged under Rule 12.21 on the assumption that no appeal lies. This judgment shows that the statutory right of appeal can still be available. Where the discharge rests only on a criminal case that ends in acquittal, Rule 16.3 may support reinstatement.