9911796707
|
Home
Issues involved:
The judgment addresses the issue of whether criminal proceedings should be stayed pending a departmental enquiry. Summary: The appeal arose from a case where disciplinary proceedings were initiated against an employee for causing a fatal accident while driving a corporation vehicle. The employee faced charges under Section 304, Part II, IPC. The High Court stayed the departmental proceedings, leading to the appeal. The appellants argued that the departmental enquiry was distinct from the criminal case and should not be stayed. They relied on previous judgments to support their stance. On the other hand, the respondent contended that staying the proceedings was justified to prevent prejudice in the criminal trial. They cited relevant case laws to support their argument. The Supreme Court analyzed the legal principles involved in staying disciplinary proceedings during criminal trials. It emphasized that each case should be considered based on its unique circumstances. The Court highlighted the different objectives of criminal prosecution and departmental enquiries, stating that the standard of proof and rules governing each process are distinct. It was concluded that unless the criminal charge is grave and involves complex legal issues, both proceedings can proceed simultaneously. The Court stressed the need for expeditious completion of departmental enquiries to maintain efficiency in public administration. In this specific case, the charge against the employee in the departmental enquiry was unrelated to the criminal offence under IPC sections 304A and 338. Therefore, the Court held that staying the proceedings was not warranted. The appeals were allowed, and no costs were imposed.
|
