' The petitioner a Deputy Superintendent of Police, was proceeded against under Punjab Civil Servants (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 1975, on a complaint made by Parvez Iqbal relating to receipt of rupees 3-1/2 lacs for getting nephew of said Parvez Iqbal re-instated in service. The Inquiry Officer exonerated the petitioner. The competent Authority also directed that proceedings under section 182, P.P.C. Be initiated against said Parvez Iqbal for falsely involving Police Officer, in the case on the charges of corruption.
2. The Inspector General of Police, the Competent Authority, later by order, dated 13-8-1999 directed that a fresh inquiry be conducted in the matter. Aggrieved of order, dated 13-8-1999, under consideration petition was submitted which was admitted to hearing on 1-10-1999.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner, A.A.G., as well as Parvez Iqbal on whose complaint the proceedings were initiated against the petitioner have been heard today.
4. Legally there is no bar for the Competent Authority to order holding of de novo inquiry against a civil servant where the first inquiry report has been found to be lopsided or the competent Authority is of the view that the Inquiry Officer had not conducted the inquiry in accordance with law. The first inquiry report can be ignored by the competent Authority and proceedings afresh can be initiated under the germane rules against the public servant. In this case, the position is somewhat different.
Parvez Iqbal by affidavit, dated 13-7-1998 had withdrawn the allegation levelled by him against the petitioner. A de novo inquiry in such a situation might not have fructified or yielded the desired results. Proprietary demands that the Competent Authority should re-examine the case and pass a fresh order in the matter as the complainant was no longer willing to come forward to support the allegation levelled against the petitioner. As a consequence, the order, dated 13-8-1999 passed by Inspector-General of Police, Punjab, is set aside. He shall re-examine the entire case and pass any appropriate order in the matter.
5. The Inspector-General of Police, Punjab, has also directed that the information be laid against Pervez Iqbal for offence under section 182, P.P.C., Parvez Iqbal had on certain considerations withdrawn the complaints against the Deputy Superintendent of Police and it was no where found by any competent forum that the application moved by him contained false information. In such a situation he could not be prosecuted for commission of offence under section 182, P.P.C. The order of respondent No.3 in this regard is not supported by law or the precedent and is set aside.
6. The petition is disposed of in the above terms.