Gujarat High Court Strikes Down Police Constable's Transfer in Corruption Case
The Gujarat High Court has delivered a significant ruling by quashing the transfer of a head constable who is embroiled in a corruption case. The court emphasized that such transfers can only be sanctioned under specific conditions of administrative exigency, as mandated by statutory provisions.
Background of the Corruption Allegations and Transfer
In 2020, the Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB) initiated a criminal case against Head Constable Chandravijaysinh Zala from Jamnagar district, accusing him of involvement in corrupt practices. Following the registration of this bribery case, Zala was transferred from Jamnagar district to Vadodara district. This move sparked a legal challenge, with Zala contesting the transfer in the high court a year later.
Legal Arguments Presented in Court
Zala argued that the government is authorized to transfer a police constable only in cases of emergent exigency that serve the public interest, as outlined under Section 28 of the Bombay Police Act and Rules 152 and 153 of the Bombay Police Rules. He contended that none of these legal requirements were met in his situation, labeling the transfer decision as arbitrary, illegal, and beyond jurisdiction.
Furthermore, Zala highlighted that the transfer order must specify the duration of the transfer and that, upon resolution of the administrative exigency, the officer should be repatriated to his parent cadre. He asserted that his transfer was not driven by such exigency but was directly linked to the corruption case filed against him.
Government's Defense and Court's Rejection
The government defended its action by submitting that a chargesheet had been filed against Zala. The prosecution referenced a guideline issued by the Director General of Police (DGP) in 2006 to justify the transfer. However, Justice Nirzar Desai of the Gujarat High Court rejected this contention.
Justice Desai stated, "The bare reading of the said note only indicates that it is a guideline issued from the office of respondent No. 2 (DGP) and it runs contrary to the said provisions of law referred to hereinabove. It is trite that any executive instruction issued which runs contrary to the statutory rules framed under Article 309 of the Constitution of India, such circular/instructions/guideline of the executive has no binding force."
Court's Final Ruling and Conditions
The High Court concluded that Zala could not have been transferred to Vadodara district from his parent district without a documented emergent administrative exigency, which was not recorded by the DGP at the time of the transfer order dated January 18, 2020. Consequently, the court quashed the transfer.
However, acknowledging the government's apprehension that Zala might influence the trial, the court permitted the authorities to transfer him away from Jamnagar city or from the location where the trial is conducted. This conditional allowance aims to balance legal procedures with practical concerns regarding the integrity of the judicial process.
This ruling underscores the importance of adhering to statutory rules in administrative decisions, particularly in sensitive cases involving corruption allegations within the police force.
