AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Petitioner is a doctor and engaged in Trauma Centre at AGMC & GBP hospital at Agartala. On 06.03.2020, a patient was brought to the said hospital at Trauma Centre by the Fire Service Department people. The petitioner was on duty at the said Centre. Early morning next day, the patient died. The hospital carried out the inquiry into the treatment that the patient received. Two member Committee for such purpose was constituted. As a culmination of the said exercise, a charge sheet dated 25.01.2021 came to be issued against the petitioner. This charge sheet contained one charge namely that while he was posted at the Trauma Centre of the said hospital, the death of the patient occurred on 07.03.2020 due to gross negligence of medical officer on duty. In the imputation of the article of charge, it was alleged that the doctor did not investigate the condition of the patient nor called for any specialist. As per the report of the Committee, the petitioner was negligent in discharge of his duties which led to the unfortunate death of the patient.
An FIR was also lodged before the concerned Police Station on 07.03.2020 in which the complainant had alleged medical negligence which resulted in the death of the admitted patient. In such criminal case, the petitioner is arrayed as one of the accused. Under such circumstances, the request of the petitioner is that the departmental inquiry may be suspended till the criminal case is over. His request is supported by the counsel for the petitioner on the ground that the allegations and evidence in criminal case as well as in departmental inquiry are identical. Forcing the petitioner to face the departmental proceedings would compel him to disclose his defence which will prejudice him in the criminal trial.
I do not think that the petitioner has made out any ground for stay of the departmental proceeding still criminal case is over. On several occasions Supreme Court has held that departmental proceedings and criminal case operate in different fields and proceed on the basis of entirely different requirements of nature of proof. The purpose of a criminal case is to punish the guilty and that departmental inquiry is to award punishment in case a Government servant is found to have committed misconduct. It is reiterated that unless the case involves grave charges and extremely complicated facts and law, the departmental inquiry should not be stayed pending a criminal trial even though the same may arise out of the same incident. It is stressed that there is no bar in the law in the departmental proceedings continuing pending a criminal trial. A reference in this respect can be made to the decisions of the Supreme Court in case of Depot Manager, Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation vs. Mohd. Yousuf Miya, etc. reported in AIR 1997 SC 2232, in case of State of Rajasthan vs. B.K. Meena and others, reported in AIR 1997 SC 13, in case of Capt. M. Paul Anthony reported in 1999 3 SCC 679, in case of Kendriya Vidyalaa Sangathan and others vs. T. Srinivas, reported in 2004 AIR SCW 4558, in case of Delhi Transport Corporation vs. Sardar Singh, reported in 2004 AIR SCW 4622 and in case of State Bank of India and others vs. Neelam Nag and another, reported in (2016) 9 SCC 491.
In the result, petition is dismissed.