The court ruled that if a petitioner is exonerated in a departmental inquiry on merit, the same allegations cannot be prosecuted further in criminal proceedings due to the higher standard of proof required.

ORDER :

(M. Nagaprasanna, J.) :

The petitioner/accused is before this Court calling in question proceedings in Special C.C.No.850 of 2018 pending before the XXI Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge and Principal Special Judge for CBI Cases, Bangalore arising out of charge sheet No.19 dated 27.11.2018 registered for offences punishable under Section 120B of the IPC and Sections 7 and 13(2) r/w 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (‘the Act’ for short).

2. Heard Sri K.N.Phanindra, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri P.Prasanna Kumar, learned Special Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent.

3. Facts, in brief, germane are as follows:-

The petitioner is an officer in the rank of Superintendent of Customs posted at Kempegowda International Airport at the relevant point in time. It is the case of the prosecution that on 27-02-2018 one Sri. S. Muthukrishna travels from Bangalore to Bangkok. On 01-03-2018 he returns to Bangalore with certain commercial goods. On his arrival, he was stopped by the petitioner for checking of the products that he had brought from Bangkok as they were attracting customs duty. It was found that the said person was in fact carrying certain goods. It is alleged that the petitioner demanded Rs.30,000/- from the said traveller in lieu of the duty that is to be paid. It is the averment that the said traveler requested the petitioner some time to withdraw the money from the ATM nearby. The said person goes out and on coming back alleges that the petitioner has demanded bribe. He then becomes the complainant. The afore-narrated facts are the subject matter of the complaint. Based upon the said complaint, a crime comes to be registered on the very day i.e., 01-03-2018 in FIR No.RC.03(A)/2018 initially alleging offence punishable under Section 7 of the Act. Since the matter was pertaining to corruption in the Customs Department, the matter was referred to the Central Bureau of Investigation for investigation. The CBI files a charge sheet before the concerned Court now alleging offences punishable under Section 120B of the IPC and Sections 7 and 13(2) r/w 13(1)(d) of the Act.

4. One analogous development takes place in the meantime. Based on the same allegations and same facts that led to the criminal proceedings, a charge sheet was issued for conduct of a departmental enquiry against the petitioner on 25-07-2019 under Rule 14 of the Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1965 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Rules’ for short). The departmental inquiry and the criminal proceedings go hand in hand or simultaneously. During the pendency of departmental inquiry, the concerned Court takes cognizance of the offence on 05-02-2020 on the charge sheet so filed by the CBI and registers Special C.C.No.850 of 2018. In the departmental enquiry, the petitioner gets exonerated with the charges so levelled against him, as the Disciplinary Authority accepts the report of the Inquiry Officer and closes the case against the petitioner on 29-12-2023. Immediately after the closure of departmental proceedings, the petitioner has knocked at the doors of this Court in the subject petition seeking quashment of the subject proceedings on the score that he has been exonerated in the departmental enquiry.

5. The learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner Sri K.N. Phanindra would vehemently contend that the departmental enquiry was initiated on the same set of facts and the documents marked are also the same as also the witnesses. Therefore, if the charge levelled against the petitioner was not proved in a departmental inquiry, it cann