PANAJI
The High Court of Bombay at Goa has dismissed a writ petition filed by former police constable Gunaji Govekar, who had challenged his dismissal from service over the 2000 mob attack at the Cortalim police outpost.
A Division Bench of Justice Valmiki Menezes and Justice Shreeram Shirsat upheld the findings of the departmental inquiry and the orders of the then Superintendent of Police (North) and the Chief Secretary.
According to case records, Govekar was on duty at the Cortalim outpost on April 4, 2000, when a mob of around 250 people, allegedly armed with stones and glass bottles, attacked the outpost.
In his first statement to senior officers, Govekar said he could identify some of the attackers by name. But in a later deposition before a magistrate, he said he could only recognise them by face. He later told the High Court that he had been in shock when he gave his first statement, as some policemen were injured in the attack while others managed to escape.
The disciplinary authority described his conduct as showing “a high degree of cowardice, treachery and fellow feeling” and said he had failed to maintain the integrity required of a civil servant.
He was dismissed from service in 2002. His appeals and review petitions before the Director General of Police and the Chief Secretary were also rejected.
In his petition, Govekar argued that the inquiry process was flawed as it did not follow Rule 6(17) of the Police Subordinate Service (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1975, and insisted his statement before the magistrate was truthful. The state countered that, as a member of a disciplined force, he had failed in his duty.
The High Court ruled that there was enough evidence before the inquiry authority to support the findings.
“The Departmental Authority/Inquiry Authority has considered the evidence in its entirety and based its findings on that evidence. Therefore, it is not open for this Court under writ jurisdiction to re-examine the adequacy or reliability of that evidence,” the court said.
It further noted that judicial review focuses only on the decision-making process and not the decision itself, and found no error in the orders passed by the authorities.
