AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Amreshwar Pratap Sahi, J.—The petitioner is a Sub-inspector of Police against whom a charge sheet has been served and he has come up for quashing of the said charge sheet in the disciplinary proceedings on the ground same incident has been investigated by the C.B.I and the matter is pending before a Criminal Court. He contends that the disciplinary proceedings should be stayed. It is further submitted that since the proceedings are grounded on the same set of facts, therefore, the prayer of the petitioner should be accepted. The on this issue is settled and the authorities are at discretion to consider the same. Reference may had to the decision in the case of Roop Singh Negi v. Punjab National Bank and others 2009 (120) FLR 610 (SC) , and in the case of The Managing Director State Bank of Hyderabad and Another Vs. P. Kata Rao, and the standard of proof required for the purpose of proceeding in a disciplinary enquiry as against that of a criminal proceeding is different. Paragraph 20 of P. Kata Rao''s case (supra) is quoted below:-
The legal principle enunciated to the effect that on the same set of facts the delinquent shall not be proceeded in a departmental proceedings and in a criminal case simultaneously, has, however, been deviated from. The dicta of this Court in Capt. M. Paul Anthony v. Bharat Gold Mines Ltd. and another,3 however, remains unshaken although the applicability thereof had been found to be dependent on the fact situation obtaining in each case.
In the event the petitioner believes it to be grounded on the same set of facts it shall be pointed out before the disciplinary authority who is at liberty to entertain such a request.
There is no ground to quash the charge sheet at this stage. Accordingly the writ petition is dismissed.