Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 8 of 8 (0.27 seconds)

State Of Rajasthan vs Shri B.K. Meena & Others on 27 September, 1996

M. Paul Anthony v. Bharat Gold Mines Ltd. and Anr. and (iii) State of Rajasthan v. Shri B.K. Meena and Ors. and replying upon these judgments it was contended by her that in the facts and circumstances of the present case it would be appropriate and desirable that the disciplinary proceedings initiated against the petitioners be stayed till the disposal of the criminal cases registered against the petitioners vide FIR No. 111/06 dated 2.7.2006. Learned Counsel had argued that in case both the proceedings are allowed to continue then it would cause a serious prejudice to the petitioners in their defense in criminal trial in cases registered against them vide afore-mentioned FIR. It was submitted that the genesis of the disciplinary proceedings is based upon the same facts on which criminal case was got registered against the petitioners and, therefore, it would not be appropriate for continuing both the proceedings simultaneously.
Supreme Court of India Cites 6 - Cited by 588 - B P Reddy - Full Document

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

M. Paul Anthony v. Bharat Gold Mines Ltd. and Anr. and (iii) State of Rajasthan v. Shri B.K. Meena and Ors. and replying upon these judgments it was contended by her that in the facts and circumstances of the present case it would be appropriate and desirable that the disciplinary proceedings initiated against the petitioners be stayed till the disposal of the criminal cases registered against the petitioners vide FIR No. 111/06 dated 2.7.2006. Learned Counsel had argued that in case both the proceedings are allowed to continue then it would cause a serious prejudice to the petitioners in their defense in criminal trial in cases registered against them vide afore-mentioned FIR. It was submitted that the genesis of the disciplinary proceedings is based upon the same facts on which criminal case was got registered against the petitioners and, therefore, it would not be appropriate for continuing both the proceedings simultaneously.
Supreme Court of India Cites 17 - Cited by 1683 - S S Ahmad - Full Document
1