An employee's acquittal in a criminal case does not automatically prevent the initiation of disciplinary proceedings, except in cases of honourable acquittal resulting in complete exoneration.

R. V. RAVEENDRAN, M. S. RAJENDRA PRASAD, JJ.

( 1 ) SRI nagarajulu naidu, learned additional government advocate is directed to take notice for respondents 1 and 2. Sri Sri nivasa rao, learned counsel is directed to take notice for respondent 3.

( 2 ) PETITIONER claims that he is working as junior engineer in Karnataka power transmission corporation limited, third respondent herein. On 5-11-1997 one gopal pandurang pawar gave a complaint to the police inspector attached to lokayukta, bijapur, that petitioner had made a demand for illegal gratification. On the basis of the said complaint, a raid/trap was held and the petitioner was prosecuted in special case No. 20 of 1998 on the file of the special judge, bijapur charging him with the offence of demanding and accepting illegal gratification of Rs. 250. 00 for providing electrical supply to the newly constructed house of complainant's grandfather, punishable under Secrions 7 and 13 (l) (d) read with Secrion 13 (2) of the Prevention Of Corruption Act, 1988. Before the special judge, seven witnesses were examined. Of the seven witnesses, P. W. 5 was the police inspector who laid the trap, P. W. 6 was the sanctioning authority, P. W. 7 was another police inspector, P. W. 4 was the complainant and p. ws. 1 to 3 were the panch witnesses. During trial, complainant and two panch witnesses (p. ws. 4, 1 and 2) turned hostile. As a consequence, prosecution case collapsed and the special judge, by judgment dated 7-12-2001 acquitted the petitioner of the charges against him holding that there was no material to prove that the petitioner demanded and accepted illegal gratification from the complainant.

( 3 ) THEREAFTER, Karnataka lokayukta has issued articles of charges dated 2-2-2002 charging him with the misconduct of demanding and accepting illegal gratification of Rs. 250. 00 on 5-11-1997 from one gopal p. Pawar to show an official favour of giving power connection to the newly constructed house of grandfather of the complainant. In the said articles of charges, witnesses cited are the said gopal pandurang pawar, complainant, panch witnesses who were p. ws. 1 and 2 apart from the police inspector who was examined as p. W. 5 in the criminal case.

( 4 ) PETITIONER filed objections dated 28-2-2002 contending that he has been honourably acquitted in the criminal case ad therefore disciplinary proceedings cannot be initiated or proceeded against him. His request for dropping the disciplinary proceedings was not accepted and by notice dated 5-3-2002 petitioner was directed to appear before the enquiry officer.

( 5 ) FEELING aggrieved, petitioner has filed this petition for quashing of articles of charges dated 2-2-2002 and the consequential departmental enquiry initiated against him contending that on acquittal by the criminal court, no disciplinary proceedings can be initiated on the same charge. In that behalf the petitioner relied on the decision in L. Shankaregouda v Karnataka power transmission corporation limited and another1, wherein a learned single judge observed thus:"i have no hesitation in holding that once the 13' report is accepted and an Orderis passed by a competent jurisdictional magistrate, the management has no power or jurisdiction to initiate any proceedings either by way of departmental proceedings or by way of criminal proceedings on the very facts. Any initiation after acceptance of the 'b' report by a learned magistrate in respect of the same charges is without jurisdiction". according to the petitioner, the position will be the same when the criminal court acquits the employee in regard to the same charges.

( 6 ) ANOTHER learned judge of this court, before whom this petition came up for preliminary hearing, being of the view that l. Shankare- gouda's case, supra, was not correctly decided, referred the matter for consideration by a division bench, being of the following view:"it is well-settled law that the criminal proceedings stand on a different footing. Further, t

Click Here to Read the rest of this document