Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 1 of 1 (0.24 seconds)

Capt.M. Paul Anthony vs Bharat Gold Mines Ltd. & Anr on 30 March, 1999

13. Learned counsel for the first respondent, by drawing our attention to the decision of the Supreme Court (1999) 3 SCC 679 (M.PAUL ANTHONY Vs. BHARAT GOLD MINES LTD.), would submit that since the charge memo is based on the criminal proceedings, in view of the acquittal by the orders of the learned Magistrate, the Department is not entitled to proceed further and the Tribunal is fully justified in interfering even at the stage of the charge memo. In the light of the said contention, we have gone through the factual details available in that case. Though it is brought to our notice that the facts and evidence in department as well as in criminal proceedings were the same, without there being any iota of difference as in Paul Anthony's case as pointed out above, there was no decision by the criminal Court on merits. Hence, we are of the view that the decision relied on by the learned counsel for the first respondent is not helpful to his stand.
Supreme Court of India Cites 17 - Cited by 1683 - S S Ahmad - Full Document
1