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

1970 Supreme(Guj) 164

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT
DIVAN, P. D. DESAI, JJ.
Ramsinhji Viraji Rathod, Parmanand Society - Petitioner
Versus
The State of Gujarat and anr. - Respondents
Special Civil Application No. 1081 of 1968
Decided on : 15-07-1970.

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :C. T. Daru, Advocate.
For the Respondent:S N. Shelat Assistant Government Pleader with H. M. Bhagat of M/s Ambubhai and Diwanji Additional Government Pleader, Nanavati, Advocate.

The concept of honourable acquittal or full exoneration is not applicable to an acquittal in a criminal trial and an accused person who is acquitted is entitled to full pay and allowances during the period of suspension.

Headnote:

BOMBAY CIVIL SERVICES RULES - RULE 152 - INTERPRETATION - ACQUITTAL IN CRIMINAL TRIAL - CONCEPT OF HONOURABLE ACQUITTAL OR FULL EXONERATION - NOT APPLICABLE - ENTITLEMENT TO FULL PAY AND ALLOWANCES DURING SUSPENSION.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner, a Junior Grade Clerk in the Civil Class III Post in the then Province of Bombay, was arrested for an alleged offence of criminal breach of trust and was suspended from service. He was convicted by the trial court but acquitted on retrial. The petitioner was reinstated after the Government of Maharashtra set aside the order of dismissal passed against him. The Government of Maharashtra issued a show cause notice to the petitioner, calling upon him to show cause as to why the period of his suspension and absence from duty should not be treated as leave due and admissible. The petitioner showed cause, but the Government of Maharashtra passed an order treating the period of suspension as such and the period of absence from duty as leave due and admissible.

Finding of the Court:

The court held that the concept of honourable acquittal or full exoneration has no place in a criminal trial and that the petitioner was entitled to full pay and allowances during the period of his suspension as required under the general provisions of law.

Issues: Whether the concept of honourable acquittal or full exoneration is applicable to an acquittal in a criminal trial.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the concept of honourable acquittal or full exoneration is not applicable to an acquittal in a criminal trial because the accused is not called upon to prove a positive case and is only required to show that the prosecution has not established its case beyond reasonable doubt. The court also held that the Government of Maharashtra did not apply the correct principles to the facts of the case and that the petitioner was entitled to full pay and allowances during the period of his suspension.

Final Decision: The court quashed and set aside the show cause notice and the order passed by the Government of Maharashtra and directed the opponents to treat the entire period from June 6, 1957 to October 28, 1965, as period spent on duty and to pay to the petitioner full pay and allowances for the entire period.

JUDGMENT :

Divan, J.

The petitioner herein has challenged the validity of Rule152 of the Bombay Civil Services Rules as unconstitutional and void and has further prayed for a direction against the opponent's directing them to treat the show cause notice dated February 18, 1967, Annexure-1 to the petition and the Order, dated April 23, 1968. Annexure L to the petition as illegal, void and of no effect whatsoever. He has further sought for a direction against the opponents for treating the period of the petitioner's absence from duty from June 6. 1957 to October 28, 1965, as period spent on duty for all purposes and for a direction to the opponents to pay the petitioner full pay and allowances for the peeled from June 6. 1957 to October 28, 1965.

2. The case of the petitioner is that he was appointed a Junior Grade Clerk in the Civil Class III Post in the then Province of Bombay, on September 20. 1931 by the District Superintendent of Police. Ultimately on May 1, 1957, the petitioner was promoted as Herd Clerk to the District Superintendent of Police, Banaskantha District. On June 5, 1957, the petitioner was arrested for an alleged offence of criminal breach of trust in his capacity as Police Accountant when he was serving in the office of the District Superintendent of Police, Ahmedabad(Rural). The petitioner was suspended from service by an order, dated June 14, 1957 and his suspension was directed to take effect from June 5, 1957 afternoon. In respect of the criminal offence alleged to have been committed by the petitioner he was prosecuted in the Court of the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, II Court, Ahmedabad.for the offence under Section 409, Indian Penal Code. On February 27, 1959. the petitioner was convicted for the offence under Section 409, Indian Penal Code. Thereafter the petitioner preferred an appeal to the Sessions Court at Ahmedabad. The appeal was dismissed on July 22, 1959. Thereafter a Criminal Revision Application was preferred to the High Court of Bombay and in that Revision Application the judgment and order, dated November 14, 1959, an order for retrial of the petitioner was passed. On retrial by the Chief City Magistrate, Ahmedabad, the petitioner was acquitted so far as the charge of criminal misappropriate, in respect of the amount of Rs. 2800/ was concerned. A true copy of the judgment by which the petitioner was acquitted has been annexed as Annexure A to the petition Against this judgment and order of acquittal, Criminal Appeal No. 366 of 1962 was preferred by the Government of Gujarat but the appeal was dismissed by the High Court on August 5, 1963. In respect of another amount of Rs. 700/ the petitioner was also prosecuted before the City Magistrate, 5th Court, Ahmedabad and by the order and judgment, dated November 9, 1963, the learned Magistrate acquitted the petitioner. No appeal was filed by the Government of Gujarati against this order of acquittal.

3. While these criminal prosecutions were pending against the petitioner the Inspector General of Police by his Order, dated September 11,1959, dismissed the petitioner from servant on the basis of the conviction of the petitioner has the earlier, order, dated February 27, 1959,and the decision in the appeal, dated July 22. 1959. Against this order of dismissal the petitioner filed Special Civil Application No. 161 of 1961 in this Court challenging the order of dismissal During the pendency of the Writ Petition, the Government of Maharashtra set aside the order of dismissal passed against the petitioner by the Inspector General of Police and directed that the petitioner should be reinstated. This order was passed by the Government on February 20, 1965. In view of this order of reinstatement, the petitioner withdrew aforesaid Special Civil Application. For the recovery of the amount alleged to have been misappropriated by the petitioner, the Government of Gujarat had filed civil suit No. 620 of 1961 in the City Civil Court at Ahmedabad, praying for a

          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 Back to top