RANCHI: Observing that adultery is no longer a criminal offence following the Supreme Court’s judgment in Joseph Shine v. Union of India, the Jharkhand High Court quashed the dismissal of a Jharkhand Armed Police (JAP) constable accused of having an adulterous relationship.
The order was passed by Justice Deepak Roshan while hearing a writ petition challenging the petitioner’s dismissal from service and the appellate order upholding the punishment.
The court held that the disciplinary authority had dismissed the constable on a ground that was not included in the charge sheet, rendering the action illegal and violative of the principles of natural justice.
Terming the dismissal arbitrary, disproportionate and violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution, the High Court also set aside the disciplinary and appellate orders.
“Further, it is pertinent to note that the offence of adultery has already been struck down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Joseph Shine vs Union of India, reported in (2019) 3 SCC 39, wherein it has been held that the offence of adultery is no more a crime. Such a provision cannot be considered to be a beneficial legislation covered by Article 15(3) of the Constitution,” the court said.
The court further held that the respondents failed to consider that the complaint had been lodged by a disgruntled complainant and that the allegations did not fall within the ambit of "moral turpitude", which could not be invoked mechanically without judicial application of mind.
It observed that the impugned order nowhere reflected proper consideration of the petitioner’s reply and had been passed solely on the ground that an FIR had been registered against him. However, a mere perusal of the charge sheet made it clear that the FIR was never part of the charges framed against the petitioner, the court said.
“The impugned action is, therefore, arbitrary, disproportionate and violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India, and cannot be sustained in the eyes of law. Consequently, the impugned orders, whereby the petitioner was dismissed from service and his appeal against the dismissal was rejected, are hereby quashed and set aside,” the court said.
The petitioner, who joined the Jharkhand Armed Police as a constable in 2007, was dismissed from service under Rule 824(b) of the Police Manual. His departmental appeal was also rejected after an FIR was lodged by his wife.
In her complaint to the Commandant, JAP, Ranchi, she alleged that despite being married and having children, the petitioner had married her and maintained a physical relationship with her between October 2019 and April 2023 before refusing to live with her.
Following a preliminary inquiry, departmental proceedings were initiated against the petitioner. Separately, an FIR was registered against him under Sections 417 and 376(2)(n) of the IPC.
In his writ petition, the petitioner argued that the dismissal order was based on a charge that had never formed part of the departmental charge sheet. He further contended that the inquiry report and the orders passed by the disciplinary and appellate authorities were non-speaking and that adultery could no longer be treated as a criminal offence following the Supreme Court’s ruling in Joseph Shine.
Upon examining the record, the High Court found that the departmental charge against the petitioner was that, despite being married, he had maintained a relationship with a married woman, amounting to indiscipline and bringing disrepute to the police department. However, the court noted that the dismissal order was ultimately based on an entirely different ground, the registration of an FIR under Section 376(2)(n) of the IPC.