IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 13414 OF 2024 (arising out of SLP(C) No. 3051 of 2023)
THE DIRECTOR GENERAL, CENTRAL INDUSTRIAL SECURITY FORCE & ORS. ..... APPELLANT(S)
VERSUS
UDAYNATH TIRKEY ..... RESPONDENT(S)
O R D E R
Leave granted.
In our opinion, the judgment of the High Court interfering
with and setting aside the order of dismissal passed in terms of
Rule 39(ii) of the Central Industrial Security Force1 Rules, 2001,
is unsustainable being contrary to law. The impugned judgment
rightly notices the law, as laid down by this Court in Union of
India & Anr. v. Tulsiram Patel & Ors.,2 which examined the pari
materia provisions of clause (b) to Article 311(2) of the
Constitution of India, albeit wrongly applied the ratio in the
background and facts of the case.
In the present case, the victim is a child, who at the time of
the registration of the First Information Report3, was aged about 4
years and 8 months. She is the daughter of another Constable
working in the CISF. She was residing with her family in the same
1 “CISF”, for short. 2 (1985) 3 SCC 398. 3 “FIR”, for short.
1
locality/neighborhood as the respondent, Udaynath Tirkey.
The detailed FIR, dated 29.03.2018, sets out the incident of
the victim having suffered sexual assault when she was visiting the
residence of the respondent, Udaynath Tirkey, to meet his daughter
and her friend, who w...