Madhya Pradesh High Court
Pushpendra Singh Sengar vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 22 June, 2022
Author: Gurpal Singh Ahluwalia
Bench: Gurpal Singh Ahluwalia
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE GURPAL SINGH AHLUWALIA
ON THE 22th OF JUNE, 2022
WRIT PETITION NO.13613 OF 2022
Between:-
PUSHPENDRA SINGH SENGAR,
AGED 35 YEARS, S/O SHRI VEER
SINGH SENGAR, OCCUPATION :
SERVICE, CONSTABLE NO.150, 2ND
BATTALION, SAF GWALIOR, R/O
PREETAMPUR COLONY, KAMPOO,
LASHKAR, GWALIOR (MADHYA
PRADESH).
........PETITIONER
(BY SHRI AJEET SHARMA - ADVOCATE)
AND
1. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
THROUGH THE PRINCIPAL
SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF
HOME, GOVERNMENT OF
MADHYA PRADESH,
MANTRAYALA, VALLABH
BHAWAN, BHOPAL (MADHYA
PRADESH).
2. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF
POLICE, POLICE HEADQUARTERS,
JAHANGIRABAD, BHOPAL
(MADHYA PRADESH).
3. THE COMMANDANT, 2ND
BATTALION, SAF KAMPOO,
2
GWALIOR (MADHYA PRADESH).
........RESPONDENTS
(BY SHRI N.S. TOMAR - GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This petition coming on for hearing this day, the Court passed the
following:
ORDER
This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed seeking the following reliefs:-
"(i) That, the present petition filed by the petitioner may kindly be allowed;
(ii) That, the charge-sheet Annexure P/1 dated 5.5.2022 issued by the respondent no.3 may kindly be quashed or in alternative the proceedings of charge-sheet Annexure P/1 may kindly be kept in abeyance till decision of the criminal case.
(iii) That, any other just, suitable and proper relief, which this Hon'ble Court deems fit, may also kindly be granted to the petitioner. Costs be also awarded in favour of the petitioner."
2. By this writ petition the petitioner has challenged the departmental charge-sheet issued to the petitioner. It is submitted by the counsel for the petitioner that the Crime Branch, Gwalior has registered Crime No.99/2021 for offence under Section 4 (a) of Public Gambling Act. The name of the petitioner has also been implicated as an accused. Forged chit was prepared by Nirmal Kirar in which it was mentioned that he has received an amount of Rs.10,000/- from Bittu, Rs.20,000/- from Panda and Rs.10,000/- from Ravi Bhadoriya and the said total amount was alleged to have been given to the petitioner as an advance. It is submitted 3 that the said chit is a forged and false document. The mobile phone and sim of the petitioner was also investigated by the police, but nothing incriminating could be found. It is submitted that on the basis of the fact that the petitioner has been implicated in Crime No.99/2021 at Police Station Crime Branch, Gwalior, the charge-sheet in question has been issued. It is submitted that once a criminal case is pending for the similar allegations, then the departmental enquiry should not proceed. It is further submitted that the allegations made against the petitioner are false and they are based on cooked-up and forged documents. Respondents should have waited for the outcome of the criminal case.
3. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.
4. The moot question for consideration is as to whether the departmental enquiry as well as the criminal trial can proceed simultaneously or not? The question is no more res integra.
5. The Supreme Court in the case of Avinash Sadashiv Bhosale (Dead) Through LRs Vs. Union of India and others reported in (2012) 13 SCC 142 has held as under:-
54. This Court recently reiterated the legal principle that departmental proceedings can be conducted simultaneously to the criminal trial in Karnataka SRTC v. M.G. Vittal Rao [(2012) 1 SCC 442 :
(2012) 1 SCC (L&S) 171] . In this case, making reference to almost all the previous precedents, this Court has reiterated the legal position as follows:
54.1. There is no legal bar for both proceedings to go on simultaneously.
54.2. The only valid ground for claiming that the disciplinary proceedings may be stayed would be to ensure that the defence of the employee in the criminal case may not be prejudiced. But even 4 such grounds would be available only in cases involving complex questions of facts and law. 54.3. Such defence ought not to be permitted to unnecessarily delay the departmental proceedings. The interest of the delinquent officer as well as the employer clearly lies in a prompt conclusion of the disciplinary proceedings.
54.4. Departmental proceedings can go on simultaneously to the criminal trial, except where both the proceedings are based on the same set of facts and the evidence in both the proceedings is common.
54.5. In our opinion, the principles culled out by this Court would be a complete answer to all the submissions made by Mr Jain.
The Supreme Court in the case of Stanzen Toyotetsu India Private Limited Vs. Girish V. and others reported in (2014) 3 SCC 636 has held as under:-
16. Suffice it to say that while there is no legal bar to the holding of the disciplinary proceedings and the criminal trial simultaneously, stay of disciplinary proceedings may be an advisable course in cases where the criminal charge against the employee is grave and continuance of the disciplinary proceedings is likely to prejudice their defence before the criminal court. Gravity of the charge is, however, not by itself enough to determine the question unless the charge involves complicated question of law and fact. The court examining the question must also keep in mind that criminal trials get prolonged indefinitely especially where the number of accused arraigned for trial is large as is the case at hand and so are the number of witnesses cited by the prosecution. The court, therefore, has to draw a balance between the need for a fair trial to the 5 accused on the one hand and the competing demand for an expeditious conclusion of the ongoing disciplinary proceedings on the other.
An early conclusion of the disciplinary proceedings has itself been seen by this Court to be in the interest of the employees.
The Supreme Court in the case of State Bank of India and Others Vs. Neelam Nag and another reported in (2016) 9 SCC 491 has held as under:-
13. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties at some length. The only question that arises for consideration is no more res integra. It is well settled that there is no legal bar to the conduct of the disciplinary proceedings and criminal trial simultaneously. However, no straitjacket formula can be spelt out and the Court has to keep in mind the broad approach to be adopted in such matters on case-to-case basis. The contour of the approach to be adopted by the Court has been delineated in a series of decisions
6. The charges levelled in the departmental charge-sheet issued against the petitioner are as under:-
%% vkjksi %% 1- Fkkuk vijk/k 'kk[kk Xokfy;j ds vijk/k dzekad 99@21 ds vkijkf/kd d`R; esa lgHkkfxrk vnkdj vkijkf/kd vopkj esa lfEefyr gksdj 'kkldh; lsod d;s vkpj.k ds izfrdwy in dh izfr"Bk ,oa e;kZnk ds fo:) lafnX/k vkpj.k dk izn'kZu dj iqfyl jsxqys'ku ds iSjk&64¼2½¼3½ dk mYya?ku djukA 2- folcy tSls vuq'kkflr cy dk lnL; gksrs gq;s Hkh mDrkuqlkj vkijkf/kd vopkj esa lfEefyr gksdj vkijkf/kd d`R; esa lgHkkfxrk vnkdj vke turk esa foHkkx dh Nfo /kwfey dj ,oa mDrkuqlkj ?kksj vuq'kklughurkiw.kZ d`R; dj 6 iqfyl jsxqys'ku ds iSjk&64¼4½ dk mYya?ku djukA
7. Thus, it cannot be said that the charges are identical to that of the allegations which have been made in the criminal case. It is well established principle of law that the degree of proof in a criminal case and a departmental enquiry is different. Even if the petitioner is acquitted in the criminal case, still it would not mean that he cannot be charge-
sheeted by the department. Since the charges are materially different to the allegations, which have been levelled against the petitioner and no defence of the petitioner would be disclosed, if the departmental enquiry is allowed to continue during the pendency of the criminal case, accordingly, no case is made out for entertaining this writ petition.
8. The petition fails and is hereby dismissed.
(G.S. AHLUWALIA) JUDGE Arun* ARUN KUMAR MISHRA 2022.06.27 10:39:12 +05'30'