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

2008 Supreme(P&H) 610

PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT
Rajesh Bindal, J.
Arvind Kumar Malhotra
Versus
Anju Anand
Decided On : MARCH 3, 2008

The principle that if charges could not be established in departmental proceedings, they should not be proceeded with under criminal law.

Headnote:

Abuse of Process of Law - Criminal Complaint - Section 506, 509 IPC - Vishakha and Ors. v. State of Rajasthan - P.S. Rajya v. State of Bihar 1996(3) R.C.R. (Criminal) 261

Fact of the Case:

Petitioner, a senior officer, faced a complaint under Section 506 and 509 IPC by a respondent who alleged sexual harassment. The petitioner had been exonerated in departmental proceedings and the same allegations were raised in the criminal complaint.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the complaint filed by the respondent was an abuse of process of law, as the allegations had already been examined by a committee and in previous court proceedings, and the petitioner had been exonerated in the departmental proceedings.

Issues: The main issue was whether the criminal complaint, based on the same allegations that had been examined in departmental proceedings and previous court proceedings, should be quashed as an abuse of process of law.

Ratio Decidendi: The court applied the principle that if the charges could not be established in departmental proceedings, they should not be proceeded with under criminal law. It also considered the time-barred nature of the complaint under Section 509 IPC.

Final Decision: The court quashed the complaint under Section 506 and 509 IPC and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom.

Judgment

Rajesh Bindal, J.

1. The prayer made in this petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short "the Code") is for quashing of complaint dated November 18, 2003 under Section 506 and 509 IPC filed by respondent in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chandigarh and the summoning order dated February 28, 2005 and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom.

2. Briefly that facts, as pleaded in the petition, are that petitioner is a senior officer working with the Chandigarh Industrial & Tourism Development Corporation Limited (for short "the Corporation"). On September 10, 2001 four employees including respondent were unauthorisedly absent from duty in the working hours. While the other employees apologized in writing for their dereliction of duty, the respondent started misbehaving and threatening the petitioner to teach him a lesson. Immediately the matter was reported to the Managing Director of the Corporation by forwarding a written note of September 10, 2001. Respondent was transferred from the place she was working. Thereafter respondent filed a complaint with the managing Director of the Corporation levelling false and concocted allegations of misbehaviour, misdemeanor and nefarious designs against the petitioner. Keeping in view the allegations of the respondent, the Corporation keeping in view the judgment of Honble Supreme Court in Vishakha and Ors. v. State of Rajasthan, constituted a committee of Mrs. Varsha Joshi, CEO, CHB, Mrs. Agya Rajinder Singh, IAS (Retd.), General Secretary, RACHETA, Mrs. Madhvi Kataria, Director Social Welfare, UT and Sh. N.S. Brar, CGM, CITCO to look into the complaint made by respondent vide order dated October 11, 2001. The proceedings before the Committee started on October 16, 2001 and after affording detailed hearing to both the parties and permitting them to lead evidence, the Committee in its enquiry report dated May 12, 2003 opined that allegations of respondent of sexual harassment on the part of the petitioner are not sufficiently borne out from the available evidence. The allegations of unwelcome sexually determined behaviour and reasonable apprehension of adverse consequences as per guidelines* of Vishakhas case (supra) by Honble the Supreme Court were not found to be established. No ground was found to take any disciplinary action against the petitioner.

3. Aggrieved against the enquiry report, respondent preferred Civil Writ Petition No. 12695 of 2003 before this Court, which was dismissed on August 14, 2003. Even the Special Leave Petition filed against the order of this Court was also dismissed by Honble the Supreme Court on October 05,2007.

4. After the dismissal of writ petition filed by the respondent by this Court on August 14, 2003 besides filing Petition for Special Leave to Appeal before Honble Supreme Court, respondent filed a complaint dated November 18, 2003 before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chandigarh under Sections 506 and 509 IPC in which the petitioner was summoned to face trial vide order dated February 28, 2005 after recording preliminary evidence in the form of statements of respondent No. 2 complainant, her husband and one witness from the office of the petitioner. It is at this stage, the petitioner approached this Court for quashing of complaint, summoning order and all subsequent proceedings thereto.

5. I have heard Mr. Hemant Saini, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Navkiran Singh, learned Counsel for the respondent.

6. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that complaint filed by the respondent is nothing else but abuse of process of law. Having failed earlier in the complaint with identical allegations before the Committee constituted in the light of the judgment of Honble the Supreme Court in Vishakhas case (supra) and after dismissal of her Civil Writ Petition by this Court challenging the findings of the enquiry, respondent filed complaint before the Court below alleging offence under Sect



Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

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