Limitation | Delay Condonation Cannot Be An Act Of Generosity: Supreme Court Refuses To Condone 31-Year Delay To Challenge Decree Sentence Suspension In Murder Cases Only Under Exceptional Circumstances; Presumption Of Innocence Erased Upon Conviction: Supreme Court Inquiry Commission Report Cannot Be Used For Disciplinary Action If Statutory Right To Cross-Examine Denied: Gauhati High Court Use Of Trademark On Website Accessible In India Constitutes Domestic Use, Geo-Blocking Mandatory For Territorial Restrictions: Delhi High Court Civil Court Jurisdiction To Interfere With DRT Proceedings Is Absolutely Barred Even For Third Parties: Madras High Court Adding a Prefix Can’t Erase Deceptive Similarity – Delhi High Court Orders Removal of ‘ARUN’ from Trademark ‘AiC ARUN’ Cannot Resile From Mediated Settlement After Taking Benefits: Supreme Court Quashes Wife's DV Case, Grants Divorce Absolute Indemnity Obligation Triggers Immediately Upon Court-Directed Deposit, Not On Final Appeal: Supreme Court Magistrate Directing Investigation Under Section 156(3) CrPC Only Requires Prima Facie Satisfaction Of Cognizable Offence: Supreme Court Cancellation Of Sale Deed Under Specific Relief Act Not A Pre-Condition To Initiate Criminal Case For Forgery: Supreme Court Amalgamated Company Cannot Claim Set-Off Of Predecessor's Losses Under Kerala Agricultural Income Tax Act Without Specific Statutory Provision: Supreme Court Overlapping Split Chargesheets May Raise Double Jeopardy Concerns, Supreme Court Notes While Granting Bail To Former Jharkhand Minister Supreme Court Grants Bail To Convicted Ex-Jharkhand Minister Facing Overlapping Prosecutions From Split Chargesheets Electricity Act Appellate Authority Is A Quasi-Judicial Body Subject To High Court’s Supervisory Jurisdiction: Madhya Pradesh High Court Mere Discrepancy In Date Of Birth Across Certificates Doesn't Amount To Fraud If No Undue Advantage Is Derived: Allahabad High Court Interest Earned On Funds Temporarily Parked Pending Project Deployment Cannot Be Taxed As 'Income From Other Sources': Delhi High Court Reference Court Cannot Set Aside Collector's Award Or Remand Matter For Fresh Determination: Allahabad High Court Administrative Transfer Causing Revenue Loss Defies Court Process: Calcutta High Court Strikes Down Ferry Ghat Handover Government Can Resume Leased Land For Public Purpose; 'Substantial Compliance' Of 60-Day Notice Sufficient: Kerala High Court Revenue Can't Cite Pending Litigation to Justify One Year of Adjudication Inaction: Karnataka High Court

Acquittal in Criminal Proceedings Doesn't Automatically Lead to Acquittal or Discharge in Departmental Proceedings: Supreme Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


On 3 Oct. 2023 , the Supreme Court of India has issued a groundbreaking judgment that underscores a crucial principle in employment disputes. The verdict emphasizes that acquittal in criminal proceedings does not automatically lead to acquittal or discharge in departmental proceedings, highlighting the distinct nature and objectives of both legal processes.

The ruling stemmed from an employment dispute brought before the Supreme Court. The case involved the interpretation of clause 4 of the Memorandum of Settlement dated 10th April 2002, which raised questions about whether it bars departmental proceedings when criminal proceedings for similar offenses are pending against an employee.

The bench of Hon'ble Justices Hrishikesh Roy and Sanjay Karol meticulously examined the legal aspects of the case. They clarified that acquittal in criminal proceedings should not be seen as conclusive evidence of innocence in departmental matters. The judgment underscores that the two proceedings—criminal and departmental—are entirely different in nature, operate in different fields, and serve different objectives.

The Supreme Court's decision reaffirmed that departmental proceedings can continue even if an individual has been acquitted in a criminal case related to the same allegations. The court stressed that the standard of proof, mode of inquiry, and rules governing these two types of proceedings are significantly distinct and separate.

The judgment also highlighted that the completion of trial in criminal cases should occur within a reasonable timeframe. It should not be used as a tactic to indefinitely stall departmental proceedings. Additionally, the court mentioned that departmental proceedings should not be unduly and unjustly delayed.

This landmark judgment has far-reaching implications for employment disputes in India, providing clarity on the relationship between criminal and departmental proceedings. It emphasizes that each case must be considered individually, taking into account various factors, and that acquittal in criminal proceedings does not automatically shield an employee from disciplinary actions in their workplace.

Date of Decision: October 3, 2023 

STATE BANK OF INDIA & ORS.   vs P. ZADENGA     

Latest Legal News