Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2015 (9) TMI 1698

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... from Rule 16.3, requirement of not punishing the officer departmentally is not absolute, and it hinges on either of the five conditions mentioned above [(a) to (e)]. From the copy of the order of acquittal passed by the Judge, Special Court, Ludhiana (Annexure P-6), it is evident that the prosecution witnesses have turned hostile, and they appear to have been won over. In Union of India and Anr. v. Bihari Lal Sidhana [ 1997 (3) TMI 604 - SUPREME COURT ], this Court has observed that it is true that the Respondent was acquitted by the criminal court but acquittal does not automatically gave him the right to be reinstated into the service. There are no illegality in the order passed by the High Court declining to interfere with the or .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 406, 420 and 120B of Indian Penal Code (Indian Penal Code) and Under Section 13(i)(d) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. After investigation charge sheet was filed against her in the court. Meanwhile, in the departmental enquiry, statements of witnesses of the department, and that of defence produced on behalf of the Appellant, were recorded by the Enquiry Officer, who submitted his report dated 8.9.2004 (Annexure P-2) with the finding that the Appellant was guilty of the charge. An opportunity of hearing was granted to the Appellant also before awarding the punishment of dismissal. The departmental appeal was dismissed on 15.12.2005 (Annexure P-4), as mentioned above, whereafter the Appellant availed remedy .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... be desirable to stay the departmental proceedings till the conclusion of the criminal case. (iii) Whether the nature of a charge in a criminal case is grave and whether complicated questions of fact and law are involved in that case, will depend upon the nature of offence, the nature of the case launched against the employee on the basis of evidence and material collected against him during investigation or as reflected in the charge-sheet. (iv) The factors mentioned at (ii) and (iii) above cannot be considered in isolation to stay the departmental proceedings but due regard has to be given to the fact that the departmental proceedings cannot be unduly delayed. (v) If the criminal case does not proceed or its disposal is being .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... nce cited in the criminal case discloses facts unconnected with the charge before the court which justify departmental proceedings on a different charge; or (e) additional evidence admissible Under Rule 16.25(1) in departmental proceedings is available. (2)... 10. Rule quoted above provides that when a police officer has been tried and acquitted by a criminal court, he shall not be punished departmentally on the same charge subject to certain conditions. In the present case, as is evident from Rule 16.3, requirement of not punishing the officer departmentally is not absolute, and it hinges on either of the five conditions mentioned above [(a) to (e)]. From the copy of the order of acquittal passed by the Judge, Special Court, Lud .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ties is sufficient. There may be cases where a person is acquitted for technical reasons or the prosecution giving up other witnesses since few of the other witnesses turned hostile, etc. In the case on hand the prosecution did not take steps to examine many of the crucial witnesses on the ground that the complainant and his wife turned hostile. The court, therefore, acquitted the accused giving the benefit of doubt. We are not prepared to say that in the instant case, the Respondent was honourably acquitted by the criminal court and even if it is so, he is not entitled to claim reinstatement since the Tamil Nadu Service Rules do not provide so. 13. In Union of India and Anr. v. Bihari Lal Sidhana (1997) 4 SCC 385, this Court has observe .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates