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

2002 Supreme(Del) 598

D.K.JAIN, H.R.MALHOTRA, A.K.SIKRI, MANMOHAN SARIN
VINOD KUMAR – Appellant
Versus
GOVERNMENT OF THE NATIONAL CAPITAL TERRITORY OF DELHI – Respondent


S. B. SINHA

( 1 ). How long a departmental proceeding should remain stayed pending judgment in a criminal trial is the question involved in these writ petitions, which arise out of judgments and orders dated 1803. 1998 and 28. 07. 1998 passed by the Central Administrative tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as, the tribunal ) in the original applications Nos. 3209 of 1992 and 2887 of 1996.

( 2 ). The fact of the matter is being noticed from CWP No. 4116 of 1998. The petitioner was a constable working with Delhi police.

( 3 ). The following charge sheet was issued against him by the additional Commissioner of Police, North-East District, Delhi :-

"it is alleged that Constable Vinod kumar, No. 931/ne posted to Distt. Lines absented himself from duty vide D. D. No. 23 dated 12. 7. 91. Meanwhile an information was received from S. S. P Ghaziabad (U. P.) that Const. Vinod Kumar, No. 931/ne has been arrested along with 4 other persons namely Rishi Pal, Dharambir, Lokendar and vinod Kumar in case FIR No. 280 Crime No. 353, dated 12. 7. 91 U/s 399/402-IPC and 25/54/59 Arms Act, P. S. Kavi Nagar while they were planning to loot a Maruti Van and a Milk Van carrying C


























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