Minor in Live-In Relationship Deemed 'Child in Need of Care' by High Court, Protection Ordered Under Juvenile Justice Act Cheque Signed, Sealed, and Bounced – No Escape from Liability: Delhi High Court Right to Defend Includes Right to Inspect Documents: Calcutta High Court Overrules Trial Court's Rejection of Inspection Petition Court Cannot Tinker with Finalized Consolidation Scheme Under Section 42: Punjab and Haryana High Court Remarriage During Appeal Period is Risky, But Not Void: Andhra Pradesh High Court State Cannot Sleep Over Its Rights: Supreme Court Criticizes Odisha Government for Delayed Appeals in Pension Dispute “Both Hands Intact” Rule is a Relic of the Past: Supreme Court Grants MBBS Admission to Disabled Student Terminal Benefits and Family Pension Alone Do Not Bar Compassionate Appointment, But Financial Distress Must Be Proven – Supreme Court Cruelty Under Section 498A IPC Is Not Limited to Dowry Harassment: Supreme Court Right to Speedy Trial Cannot Be Defeated by Delay Tactics: Punjab & Haryana High Court Orders Fast-Tracking of Cheque Bounce Case Framing Charges Under Section 193 IPC Without Following Section 340 CrPC is Illegal: Calcutta High Court Doctrine of Part Performance Under Section 53-A TPA Not Applicable Without Proof of Possession: Andhra Pradesh High Court Mere Allegations of False Implication Cannot Override Strong Forensic and Documentary Evidence: Delhi High Court Upholds Conviction in Elderly Woman’s Murder and Robbery Case Applicant Not a Sexual Predator, Relationship Was Consensual: Bombay High Court Grants Bail in POCSO Case Fraudulent Transfers to Evade Creditors Cannot Escape Scrutiny: Punjab & Haryana High Court Restores Execution Petition Gujarat High Court Rules That Contractual Employees Cannot Claim Regularization of Services Serious Charges and Victim’s Suicide Justify Continued Detention: Gauhati High Court Denies Bail in POCSO Case No Permanent Establishment in India, Rejects Notional Income Taxation: Delhi High Court Rules in Favor of Nokia OY Statutory Bail Under NDPS Act Can Be Denied If FSL Report Reaches Court Before Bail Plea": Calcutta High Court Termination After Acquittal is Unjust: Bombay High Court Quashes Dismissal of Shikshan Sevak, Orders 50% Back Wages Denial of MBBS Seat Due to Administrative Lapses is Unacceptable": Andhra Pradesh High Court Awards ₹7 Lakh Compensation to Wronged Student Sessions Court Cannot Reclassify Non-Bailable Offences While Granting Anticipatory Bail: Allahabad High Court

High Court of Delhi Modifies Disciplinary Punishment Based on "Honorable Acquittal" in Criminal Case

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a recent judgment delivered on July 24, 2023, the High Court of Delhi modified the disciplinary punishment imposed on police constables and head constables of the Delhi Police. The Court based its decision on the "honorable acquittal" of the accused in a criminal case, wherein the prosecution failed to prove the charges beyond a reasonable doubt.

The case revolved around an incident in which an undertrial prisoner escaped from police custody during transit to a court hearing in 2007. Disciplinary proceedings were initiated against the police officers, resulting in the imposition of a punishment of forfeiture of ten years of approved service by the Disciplinary Authority.

Subsequently, the Appellate Authority reduced the punishment to five years of forfeiture on a permanent basis. The respondents then challenged this punishment in original applications (OAs) in 2010, but the Tribunal dismissed their OAs in 2011.

The turning point in the case came when the respondents were acquitted by the criminal court in 2012 due to the prosecution's failure to present sufficient evidence to prove the charges against them. Relying on the Supreme Court's definition of "honorable acquittal," the High Court recognized the respondents' acquittal as honorable, given the prosecution's inability to establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

Considering the passage of time since the initiation of the disciplinary proceedings and various rounds of litigation, the Court found that modifying the punishment to forfeiture of five years of approved service on a temporary basis was just and proportionate.

In its judgment, the High Court emphasized the significance of "honorable acquittal" and the authority of the Tribunal to modify punishments based on such acquittals. The Court held that the Tribunal's decision was in accordance with the principles of justice and fairness, making the modification of punishment justified.

High Court dismissed the writ petition challenging the Tribunal's order and vacated the interim order that had stayed the impugned order. The Court made no order regarding costs.

Date of Decision: July 24, 2023

GOVT OF NCT OF DLEHI & ORS vs NIHAL SINGH & ORS.

Similar News