Departmental and criminal proceedings can proceed simultaneously; staying one depends on showing potential prejudice, which was not established in this case.

JUDGMENT :

Vikas Bahl, J.

This order will dispose of three writ petitions i.e., CWP-8208- 2024 filed by Ajay Kumar , CWP-28388-2018 filed by Rakesh Kumar and CWP-15001-2021 filed by Devender Kumar as common issue(s) of facts and law arise in all the said cases.

2. The primary issue which arises for consideration in all the above-said writ petitions is as to “whether the regular departmental proceedings are required to be stayed or the examination of the common witnesses is required to be deferred till the culmination of the criminal proceedings or till the said common witnesses are examined in the criminal proceedings, which criminal proceedings as per the case of the petitioners, relate to the same incident, on account of which departmental proceedings have been initiated against the petitioners, in the facts and circumstances of the individual cases”. The only prayer pressed by counsel appearing in all the writ petitions is for staying the examination of the common witnesses in the departmental proceedings till the said witnesses are examined in the criminal proceedings. The common argument raised by the counsel for the petitioners is that there are common witnesses in the departmental proceedings and in the criminal proceedings and the said common witnesses should not be examined in the departmental proceedings till the time they are examined in the criminal proceedings as in case the said witnesses are examined in the departmental proceedings, then, the same would cause prejudice to the case of the petitioners in the criminal proceedings. In support of the said argument, learned counsel for the petitioners has relied upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in case titled as “Capt. M. Paul Anthony Vs. Bharat Gold Mines Ltd.”, reported as 1999(3) SCC 679.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents have opposed the writ petitions and have prayed for the dismissal of the writ petitions.

4. This Court has heard learned counsel for the parties and has perused the paper-books and finds that all the present writ petitions are meritless and deserve to be dismissed for the reasons which have been detailed hereinafter.

5. Before considering the facts of the above said cases, it would be relevant to note that this Court had after considering the same argument/issue as raised in the present writ petitions, dismissed a bunch of writ petitions i.e. CWP-5111-2024 titled as Mustaq Vs. State of Haryana and others and other connected matters vide judgment dated 10.04.2024. Various judgments of the Hon‘ble Supreme Court as well as of this Court were considered and the principles/conclusions which emerged from the said judgments were detailed in para 17 of the judgment dated 10.04.2024 of this Court. Para 17 of the said judgment is reproduced hereinbelow:-

“17. From the above said judgments, the following principles/conclusions emerge:-

1. Departmental proceedings and proceedings in a criminal case can proceed simultaneously as there is no bar in their being conducted simultaneously though separately. (Specific reference in this regard can be made to the judgment in case of Capt. M. Paul Anthony (supra) (relevant portion of which is reproduced in Para 5 of the present order) and State Bank of India and Ors. (supra) (relevant portion of which is reproduced in Para 8 of the present order)

2. The approach and objective in the criminal proceedings and the disciplinary proceedings is altogether distinct and different inasmuch as in the disciplinary proceedings, the question is as to whether the employee is guilty of such conduct as would merit his removal from service or imposition of lesser punishment whereas in the criminal proceedings, the question is as to whether the offences registered against him are established and if established, what sent