Readiness and Willingness Under Section 16(c) Is Not a Ritualistic Phrase — Plaintiff Must Prove It With Substance, Not Just Words: Karnataka High Court FIR in Disproportionate Assets Case Quashed: Patna High Court Slams SP for 'Non-Application of Mind' and 'Absence of Credible Source Information' Ownership of Vehicle Linked to Commercial Quantity of Heroin – Custodial Interrogation Necessary: Punjab & Haryana High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail under Section 482 BNSS Death Caused by Rash Driving Is Not a Private Dispute — No FIR Quashing on Basis of Compromise in Section 106 BNS Cases: Punjab & Haryana High Court No Bank Can Override Court Orders: Rajasthan High Court Slams Axis Bank for Unauthorized Withdrawal from Court-Ordered FD" Indian Courts Cannot Invalidate Foreign Arbitral Awards Passed Under Foreign Law: Madhya Pradesh High Court Enforces Texas-Based Award Despite Commercial Court’s Contrary Decree Calling Wife by Her Caste Name in Public Just Before Suicide is Immediate Cause of Self-Immolation: Madras High Court Upholds Husband’s Conviction Under Section 306 IPC No Work No Pay Is Not a Universal Rule: Punjab & Haryana High Court Dock Identification Without Prior TIP Is Absolutely Useless: P&H High Court Upholds Acquittal in Attempt to Murder Case Filing Forged Court Pleadings in Union Government’s Name is Criminal Contempt: Karnataka High Court Sentences Litigant to Jail Execution of Will Proved, But Probate Justly Denied Due to Concealment of Property Sale: Delhi High Court Mere Designation Doesn’t Establish Criminal Liability: Bombay High Court Quashes Proceedings Against ICICI Officials in Octroi Evasion Case Fraud on Power Voids the Order: Supreme Court Quashes FIR Against Karnataka BJP Leader R. Ashoka, Slams Politically Motivated Prosecution Cause of Fire Is Immaterial If Fire Itself Is Insured Peril: Supreme Court Rebukes Insurer’s Repudiation Dragging a Trained Army Officer Up 20 Steps Without Resistance? The Story Lacks Credence: Supreme Court Upholds Acquittal in Army Officer’s Murder Semen Stains Alone Do Not Prove Rape: Supreme Court Acquits Doctor Accused of Rape No Mortgage, No SARFAESI: Supreme Court Rules Against NEDFi, Says Recovery Action in Nagaland Without Security Agreement Was Illegal Parity Cannot Be Denied by Geography: Supreme Court Holds Jharkhand Bound by Patna HC's Judgment, Orders Pay Revision for Industries Officer Once Power Flows Continuously from a Synchronized Turbine, It Is No Longer Infirm: Supreme Court Orders TANGEDCO to Pay Fixed Charges to Penna Electricity

Acquittal in Criminal Case Does Not Automatically Affect Departmental Proceedings: Punjab & Haryana High Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


The Punjab and Haryana High Court ruled that an acquittal in a criminal case does not automatically impact the outcome of disciplinary proceedings. This is due to the differing standards of proof required in criminal and departmental proceedings.

The petitioners, Harbhajan Singh and another, employed as 'Sewadar' and 'S/Granthi' respectively, were implicated in a case involving an incident at a Gurdwara where another employee vomited near the holy book. Despite not being directly responsible, they were suspended and later penalized by the Shiromani Gurdwara Prabandhak Committee (SGPC). Subsequently, an FIR was filed against them, but they were acquitted by the criminal court. Post-acquittal, they sought the quashing of the departmental charge-sheet and penalties, and requested reinstatement with all benefits.

Whether acquittal by a criminal court affects ongoing or concluded departmental proceedings.

Whether the penalties imposed by the SGPC should be set aside following the criminal acquittal.

Standard of Proof: The court emphasized the differing standards of proof in criminal and departmental proceedings. "The standard of proof in a criminal case is beyond reasonable doubt, whereas in departmental proceedings, it is based on the preponderance of probabilities" (Para 10).

Independent Proceedings: The court reiterated that departmental and criminal proceedings are independent. Citing Supreme Court precedents, it noted, "Acquittal in a criminal case cannot be a ground for interfering with the disciplinary authority's punishment" (Para 9).

Supreme Court Judgments: The court referred to the judgments in Deputy Inspector General of Police v. S. Samuthiram and State of Rajasthan v. Phool Singh to underscore that departmental proceedings can continue independently of criminal trial outcomes (Paras 8-9).

Nature of Acquittal: It was noted that the acquittal of the petitioners was not honorable but due to the prosecution's failure to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt. This distinction is crucial in determining the impact on departmental actions (Para 10).

Decision: The court dismissed the petition, holding that the disciplinary proceedings and the penalties imposed were valid despite the criminal acquittal. The court found no grounds to interfere under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution, affirming that the penalties were supported by substantial evidence and within the legal framework (Paras 12-13).

Date of Decision: May 14, 2024

Harbhajan Singh and another v. Shiromani Gurdwara Prabandhak Committee and another

Latest Legal News