In a recent judgment concerning the validity of disciplinary proceedings when it is based on the same evidence, witnesses, and circumstances as in a criminal case that ended up in acquittal, the division bench of J.K. Maheshwari and K.V. Viswanathan, JJ. has held that if the charges in the departmental enquiry and the criminal court are identical or similar, and if the evidence, witnesses and circumstances are the same, it will have significant bearings on the outcome of the departmental proceedings and the same can be quashed on this ground.
Issues before the consideration of the court:
- Was the constable's dismissal from service pursuant to the departmental enquiry justified?
- Given the facts of the case, what is the effect of the acquittal, ordered by the Appellate Judge in the criminal trial, on the order of dismissal passed in the departmental enquiry?
Background:
A constable in the services of the Rajasthan Police was dismissed from the service pursuant to a department enquiry. A criminal case was also initiated against him on the same set of charges as that of the department enquiry. The Criminal trial ended in the acquittal of the individual after full consideration of the prosecution evidence and after noticing that the prosecution had miserably failed to prove the charge. The single Judge and the Appellate court, by the impugned judgment, dismissed the writ petition by holding that the standard of proof in a criminal proceeding and departmental proceeding is different. The Courts found no infirmity in the order of the Disciplinary Authority. Being aggrieved, the constable filed the present appeal.
The Supreme Court Judgment and analysis:
The Division Bench of J.K. Maheshwari and K.V. Viswanathan, JJ. negated the order of the High Court and held that if the charges in the departmental enquiry and the criminal court are identical or similar, and if the evidence, witnesses and circumstances are the same, it will have significant bearings on the outcome of the departmental proceedings and the same can be quashed on this ground.
The Supreme Court further held that if the findings of the disciplinary authorities are arrived at after ignoring the relevant material, the Court in a judicial review can interfere with the finding of the disciplinary enquiry while acknowledging the settled position of law that a Writ Court's power to review the order of the Disciplinary Authority is very limited, the Court said that the scope of enquiry is only to examine whether the decision-making process was legitimate.
Thus, the Court, while setting aside the orders passed by the disciplinary authority and the appellate authority, said that allowing them to stand would be unjust, unfair and oppressive, as the charges were not just similar but identical and the evidence, witnesses and circumstances were all the same.
[Ram Lal v. State of Rajasthan, decided on 04-12-2023]
https://www.scconline.com/blog/post/2023/12/19/inside-sc-verdict-effect-acquittal-criminal-trial-order-dismissal-passed-departmental-enquiry/
https://www.scconline.com/blog/post/2023/12/19/inside-sc-verdict-effect-acquittal-criminal-trial-order-dismissal-passed-departmental-enquiry/
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
