SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1987 Supreme(SC) 174

V.BALAKRISHNA ERADI, A.P.SEN
Jagdish Prasad – Appellant
Versus
State Of Rajasthan – Respondent


(1) DELAY condoned. Special leave granted. Arguments heard.

(2) AFTER hearing learned counsel for the parties, we are of the considered opinion that the High court having recorded an order of acquittal could not have made the direction in the last para of its judgment that the appellant was being acquitted giving him the benefit of doubt and therefore was not entitled to reinstatement and payment of back wages. The question of reinstatement is not for a criminal court. It is for the State government to consider whether he should be reinstated at all having regard to the fact that the acquittal of the appellant proceeds on benefit of doubt and to consider the question of grant of such relief upon his reinstatement as regards salary and other service benefits, if any.

(3) THE appeal is disposed of accordingly.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top