Back
IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM & ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Kardak Ete
Ajay Kumar Handique @ Ajay Kr Handique Son Of Dina Nath Handique – Appellant
Versus
State Of Assam To Be Represented By The Principal Secretary To The Home And Political Department – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Kardak Ete, J.
Heard Mr. I. Rafique, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. C. K. S. Baruah, learned Government Advocate for the State respondent.
2. Challenges made in these writ petitions are to the order dated 06.09.2024, passed by the Director General of Police, Assam whereby, a fresh/de novo enquiry has been directed to be conducted while rejecting the findings of the enquiry officer dated 22.08.2025 against the petitioner, and the suspension order dated 13.12.2023, whereby, the petitioner was placed under suspension for following his arrest in connection with ACB P.S. Case No. 103/2023, under Section 7 (a) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.
3. The petitioner is an Inspector (UB) of Police under Assam Police. While working as Officer-In-Charge of Dhula Police Station, Darrang District, Assam, the petitioner has been subjected to departmental proceedings in connection with ACB P.S. Case No. 103/2023, under Section 7(a) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The petitioner, along with one Muktar Hussain, was arrested on 13.11.2023 on the basis of the F.I.R. lodged on 29.11.2023 by one Shri Rafik Ali before the Officer-In-Charge ACB Police Station,
The disciplinary authority cannot order a fresh enquiry without identifying material irregularities in the previous proceedings, emphasizing adherence to the procedural rules and safeguarding the rig....
De novo inquiries lacking essential witness examinations violate natural justice principles, rendering dismissal decisions unlawful.
The disciplinary authority can remit the case for further enquiry, but a de-novo enquiry is not warranted unless there is a patent irregularity or illegality in the earlier enquiry report.
Action to initiate a de novo enquiry on the same charges after completion of the earlier enquiry culminating with findings of exoneration of the petitioner is wholly without jurisdiction and accordin....
A de novo inquiry is permissible under Rule 26(1) of the CDA Rules when substantial evidence or procedural defects existed in the prior inquiry, ensuring compliance with principles of natural justice....
Disciplinary authorities may order a de novo enquiry in cases of procedural irregularities, allowing for a fair assessment of allegations, as long as the accused can participate and defend against th....
The Disciplinary Authority can order further enquiry only if serious defects exist in the initial enquiry; it cannot do so after a finding of exoneration.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
