1991 PLP (C (PLC(CS))

We heard the arguments of the appellant's learned counsel, Mr. Salman Ansari and the learned A.A.-G. We also went through all the documents relevant for disposal of the appeal.

2. As disclosed m the statement of allegations the appellant faced the enquiry on two charges; namely, first, he collected a total amount of Rs.16,000 as illegal gratification from eight prostitutes of the brothel whose names are specified in the statement and, second, being a member of regular and disciplined Force the appellant brought bad name to the Police Department by having illicit terms with the prostitutes of the brothel.

3. According to the enquiry report the first charge remained unproved. Despite the best efforts to locate the prostitutes, who had allegedly paid the illegal gratification, their attendance could not be procured. In this connection we may refer to the observations of the Enquiry Officer which read as under:- "I have issued so many notices for causing the attendance of P.Ws. (these women) but every time the S.H.O.Town has shown his inability that constant raids were conducted in Brothel area by the S.H.O. Town and Inspector C.I.A., Mirpurkhas. These women who were to be examined as P.Ws. have shifted their dwellings to some unknown towns of Sindh and Punjab as a result of which their attendance remained unprocured. In addition to that I myself attempted to locate these women and their guardians, but none could be located. For the purpose of obtaining evidence of these women and their so-called guardians in regard to the corruption on the part of the defaulter the proceedings were allowed to protract on but of no avail. Therefore for want of evidence of victim women count No. 1, remained unproved."

4. As regards the second charge the Enquiry Officer relied upon the appellant's own admission. The relevant part of his admission as reflected in his reply to the charge-sheet is in the following words: 5. "In fact I had married with one Mst. Akhtari daughter of Dost Muhammad Bhatti belonging to the brothel at the intervention of some nekmards to leave brothel and to pass a happy, matrimonial and respectable life in future. After the marriage with the aforesaid woman, I kept her in my house ......................due to my bad luck, the women shown in the summary of allegations started visiting my house frequently Mst. Akhtari asked above women not to visit her house but they had been continuously visiting my house, therefore, I prevented them not to come to my house and this annoyed them and they started campaign against me.

6. The learned Line Officer got vacated my quarter at once on the night of Baqra Eid and without any notice. After vacation of the quarter I shifted Mst. Akhtari to Siyal Colony but the above-mentioned women did not stop to come to my house and ultimately I had to pronounce the divorce to Mst. Akhtari ...............

7. The appellant's above statement is self-speaking. He has made no secret of having married one of the prostitutes of the brothel namely Mst. Akhtari. Obviously this could have happened only after his frequent visits to the brothel resulting in development of his illicit connections with the women of that area. Excepting his solitary word there is no evidence with regard to the said marriage. He has attempted in vain to explain that his marriage with Mst. Akhtari was due to intervention of some nekmards. He has neither named those nekmards nor has examined them in his defence in course of the enquiry. Furthermore, it is appellant's own admission that after his so-called marriage with Mst. Akhtari, the prostitutes named in the statement of allegations kept visiting his quarter which admittedly was situated in the Police Lines. It seems the nuisance of the prostitutes so vitiated the environments that the officer in charge of the Police Lines was compelled to get the appellant vacate his quarter. This is not denied by the appellant himself who has further admitted that after vacation of the quarter in Police Lines he shifted Mst. Akhtari to Siyal Colony but there too the prostitutes of the brothel kept visiting his house. He has further stated that ultimately he had to divorce Mst. Akhtari because visits of the women of the brothel to her did not stop.

8. After taking into consideration the above revealing admission on the part of the appellant, we are inclined to agree with the findings of the Enquiry Officer that the second charge was proved against the appellant. The Enquiry Officer has expressed his findings on the second charge in the following words: "The defaulter's inculpatory admission, discussed in para supra was the irresistible proof of his being a bad reputed Police Officer, which involves his moral turpitude, it needs no further elucidations to lay emphasis on" In view of the above discussion we hold that the second charge is proved against the appellant.

9. Apart from the above, the appeal suffers from a legal lacuna and is hit by limitation. The appellant's departmental appeal was rejected by the D.I.-G.P. by his order dated 19-12-1988. Instead of coming to this Tribunal within 30 days of the said order, latest by 17-1-1989, the appellant chose to approach the L-G.P: As he had right of only one appeal which was exhausted with passing of the D.I. G.P's order referred to above, the period wasted by him in going to the I: G.P. was not legally condonable. As has been held by this Tribunal in several cases, after rejection of the departmental appeal by the D.I: G.P., further approach to I.-G.P. was in the nature of second appeal which is not permitted under the law. Since police personnel have to be placed at par with other civil servants in regard to filing of departmental appeal, concession of allowing police personnel to go to the I.-G.P. after rejection of the departmental appeal at the level of the D.I.-G., would obviously amount to discrimination which cannot be legally allowed. For above reasons the appeal is dismissed with no order as to costs. M.Y.H./284/Sr.S Appeal dismissed.