Exoneration in departmental proceedings does not automatically lead to dismissal of criminal charges; higher standard of proof applies in criminal cases.

ORDER :

S. PUJAHARI, J.

1. The petitioner who is charge-sheeted as a co-accused in Vigilance Case No.5 of 2007 corresponding to T.R. No.1 of 2013 in the court of the Special Judge (Vigilance), Bhubaneswar, has filed this application under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. seeking for quashing of the said criminal proceeding.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel appearing for the Vigilance Department, and perused the relevant papers on record vis-à-vis the contentions raised by the rival sides.

3. At the relevant time the petitioner was working as Asst. Engineer (Civil) in the erstwhile department of Irrigation and Power under the Chief Engineer, Potteru Irrigation Project, and the Vigilance police drew up / registered FIR vide Bhubaneswar Vigilance P.S. Case No.5 of 2007 against the petitioner and other co-accused persons, alleging, inter-alia, that in connection with the irrigation repairing work during the year 2003 under the Food for work programme at Pratap Ramchandrapur Irrigation Section although 319.7733 MT of rice was shown to have been received and handed over to the contractors for being distributed to the labourers, and though distribution was shown to have been made vide Utilisation Certificate, on verification of records, due procedure was found to have not been adopted in the process of tender, maintenance of record, allotment of work, execution of agreement, distribution of rice etc. It is alleged that the officials including the petitioner in connivance with the contractors misappropriated public money to the tune of Rs.33,41,630.90 paise.

4. After investigation, charge-sheet was submitted on 29.08.2012 against the petitioner and the co- accused under Sections 13 (2), 13(1)(c)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act and Sections 409 , 408, 471, 420 and 120-B of IPC with specific allegation that there was criminal misappropriation of rice to the tune of 198.7733 MT worth Rs.20,77,180.98 paise by forging the account register, indent forms and work file. The learned Special Court, Vigilance took cognizance of the said offences on 21.01.2013, and charge has also been framed against the petitioner and the co-accused persons by the trial Court as per the order dated 04.05.2018. The petition filed by the present petitioner for discharge was rejected by the trial Court on 11.04.2018.

5. It may also be stated here that on 01.09.2012, i.e., in the aftermath of submission of the charge- sheet by the Vigilance Department, a common proceeding was initiated on administrative side by the Water Resources Department against the accused- officers including the petitioner under the Services Rules, on the same set of charges, and on the basis of the findings rendered by the Enquiring Officer and report submitted, the State Government exonerated the petitioner alone from the charges levelled against him.

6. It further appears that since the petitioner was not given promotion, he approached the Odisha Administrative Tribunal and thereafter this Court in W.P.(C) No.25713 of 2019, and in pursuance of the order passed by the said Tribunal in O.A. No.116 of 2018 and this Court in the writ petition referred to above, the State Government have given promotion to the petitioner on adhoc basis to the rank of SE (C), Level-I as per the Notification dated 11.06.2020 of the Department of Water Resources.

7. In the factual scenario as above, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that since the petitioner has already been exonerated from the same set of charges, in the Disciplinary Proceeding on the finding that there was no loss to the Government by any