Suspension of a government servant during criminal proceedings must be justified, not punitive, and subject to periodic review to ensure fairness and adherence to procedural norms.

ORDER :

1. Petitioner (a Class-IV employee – Safai Karamchari), is before this Court seeking quashing of an administrative order dated 02.03.2023, vide which, he was suspended from service due to registration of an FIR No.43/2023 dated 18.02.2023 for the alleged offences under Sections 7 & 7(a) of Prevention of Corruption Act (Amended), 2018, read with Section 120-B of IPC against the petitioner by the Anti Corruption Bureau.

2. Vide an interim order dated 08.08.2023 passed by a Coordinate Bench of this Court, operation and effect of the impugned suspension order was stayed in the following terms:-

“In S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 8203/2023:

1. Learned counsel for the petitioner has shown to this Court the order dated 02.05.2023 passed by a coordinate Bench of this Court in Anita Khichar Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors., S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3656/2023 and prays that the interim order be passed in favour of the present petitioner also. The order reads as follows:

“1. Learned counsel representing the petitioner submit that in similar issue, the Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 19.05.2022 passed in SB Civil Writ Petition No. 7103/2022 (Pintu Lal Jat Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.) had granted indulgence and effect and operation of the impugned order was stayed.

2. Learned counsel representing the petitioner further submit that the order dated 02.03.2023 (Annexure-2) while placing the petitioner under suspension, has been passed by the competent authority based on the communication received from Anti Corruption Department, without applying its mind.

3. Submissions have been made and the action of the respondents does not fall within any of the requirement of Rule 13 of the Rajasthan Civil Services (Classification, Control &Appeal) Rules, 1958.

4. Issue notice. Issue notice of the stay application as well, returnable within a period of four weeks.

5. In the meanwhile and until further orders, effect and operation of the impugned order dated 02.03.2023 (Annexure-2)shall remain stayed.

6. Connect and list alongwith SB Civil Writ Petition No.7103/2022.”

2. The aforequoted interim order shall also operate in favour of the petitioner.

3. In view of above, issue notice to the respondents, returnable 08.09.2023.

4. List along with SBCWP No.3656/2023.

5. In the meanwhile and until further orders, effect and operation of the impugned order dated 02.03.2023 (Annexure-2)shall remain stayed.

In S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 35/2023:-

List alongwith SBCWP No.3656/2023.”

3. Apropos, petitioner continues to discharge his services without being suspended during pendency of the writ proceedings.

4. Controversy centering on the scope and breadth of the core legal issue concerning the continuation of the suspension of a government servant during the pendency of an investigation or criminal trial in connection with a criminal offence, and the parameters governing the same, have been decided in a detailed order/judgment dated 27.03.2025, rendered by this Court in case title Naru Lal Meghwal Vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr., S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 14863/2016.

5. The reasons and discussion contained in Naru Lal Meghwal’s judgment shall be read as part and parcel of the instant order and same are not being repeated for sake of brevity. However, it is deemed appropriate that the concluding part of the judgment be reproduced for ready reference, which is as below:

“CONCLUSION

25. Two questions thus arise i.e. first, whether a government servant, either accused in an FIR or an under trial in a pending criminal proceeding or proposed to be prosecuted upon grant of administrative sanction for prosecution, can continue to be suspended from service until the conclusion of trial till he is acquitted ? Second, does such a suspension, when prolonged due to delay not attributable to the suspended government servant, constitute a collateral punishment, imposed solely on the state’s harboring a suspicion that the accused government servant will ultimately be convicted