Back
2024 Supreme(All) 1692
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
ALOK MATHUR, J.
Amit Yadav – Petitioner
Versus
State of U.P. and Others – Respondents
Writ (A) No. 10700 of 2024
Decided On : 20-11-2024
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioners: Syed Anzar Husain, Ashutosh Kumar Srivastava, Ram Kishan Sharma.
IMPORTANT POINT
Simultaneous departmental and criminal proceedings are permissible under the Uttar Pradesh Police Officer of Subordinate Ranks, (Punishment and Appeal) Rules, 1991, without prejudicing the officer's defense.
Headnote:
(A) Uttar Pradesh Police Officer of Subordinate Ranks, (Punishment and Appeal) Rules, 1991 - Rule 14(1) - Disciplinary proceedings initiated against a police officer for lodging a false FIR against his brother-in-law - Court held that simultaneous departmental and criminal proceedings are permissible and do not prejudice the officer's defense. (Paras 5, 14, 18)
(B) Judicial Trial - The court emphasized that the result of the judicial trial should be awaited before initiating disciplinary proceedings, but this does not apply when the officer has voluntarily submitted to the inquiry. (Paras 5, 16)
Facts of the case:
The petitioner, a Head Constable, challenged the charge-sheet issued against him for allegedly lodging a false FIR against his brother-in-law, asserting that the disciplinary proceedings were initiated prematurely while a criminal trial was ongoing.
Findings of Court:
The court found no merit in the petitioner's claims, affirming that the disciplinary proceedings could continue alongside the criminal trial without prejudice to the officer's defense.
Issues: The main issues were whether disciplinary proceedings could be initiated before the conclusion of a criminal trial and whether the charges in both proceedings were the same.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that simultaneous proceedings are permissible and that the petitioner had not demonstrated any prejudice to his defense due to the ongoing criminal trial.
Result: Writ petition dismissed.
JUDGMENT :
ALOK MATHUR, J.
1. Heard Sri Ashutosh Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel on behalf of the petitioner as well as learned Standing Counsel on behalf of the respondents.
2. By means of present writ petition, the petitioner has assailed the charge-sheet dated 19.10.2023 issued by Presiding Officer/Circle Officer, Sadar, District-Gonda and also seeks certiorari to quash the impugned departmental disciplinary proceedings inasmuch as against the petitioner under Rule 14(1) of the Uttar Pradesh Police Officer of Subordinate Ranks, (Punishment and Appeal) Rules, 1991.
3. It has been submitted that the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is working on the post of Head Constable in Gonda at the relevant time where a First Information Report was lodged on 04.04.2023 by one Prince Yadav, the brother-in-law of the petitioner under Section 307 I.P.C. the said FIR was lodged against Surendra Yadav, the brother-in-law of the petitioner who is alleged to have assaulted and injured the petitioner due to a family dispute. Investigation into the said occurrence was conducted and it was found that the petitioner's brother-in-law has lodged false First Information Report against Surendra Yadav and the petitioner was also involved in falsely implicating his brother-in-law which fact was established during the investigation. That the petitioner had deliberately got himself injured in order to lodge the First Information Report against the brother-in-law, Surendra Yadav. During the investigations no material was found on which a charge-sheet would be filed against the accused therein namely Surendra Yadav the brother-in-law of the petitioner but Section 195/203/211/109 of the I.P.C. and 3/25/5/27 of the Arms Act was lodged against the petitioner and his brother Prince Yadav and other co-accused who were found to have falsely implicated the brother-in-law of the petitioner. On the conclusion of the investigation a charge-sheet has been filed in the Court of competent jurisdiction on 24.06.2023 where the petitioner is facing the trial.
4. That on the ground of the same facts the departmental proceedings was initiated against the petitioner under Rule 14(1) of the Uttar Pradesh Police Officer of Subordinate Ranks, (Punishment and Appeal) Rules, 1991. A charge-sheet was issued to the petitioner on 19.10.2023 levelling the allegation of lodging a false First Information Report against the brother-in-law, he has brought disrepute to the name of the entire Police Department. The petitioner denied the allegations levelled against him by submitting his reply on 14.11.2023 and the Inquiry Officer has concluded the inquiry and submitted the inquiry report to the disciplinary authority on 07.08.2024. On submission of the inquiry report the disciplinary authority has issued a show cause notice dated 25.09.2024 asking the petitioner to submit his explanation. It is at this stage that the petitioner has sought to file a present writ petition challenging the entire disciplinary proceedings as well as the show cause notice dated 25.09.2024 apart from the charge-sheet issued to him.
5. In support of submissions, learned counsel for the petitioner relied upon paragraph 492 of the Uttar Pradesh Police Officer of Subordinate Ranks, (Punishment and Appeal) Rules, 1991, according to which the result of the judicial trial of the Police Officer should be awaited before initiating disciplinary proceeding against him. He has submitted that on the same set of facts, a criminal trial is underway and accordingly the respondents should not have initiated disciplinary proceedings prior to conclusion of the said trial and hence the entire proceedings are illegal and arbitrary and deserves to be quashed. In support of his submissions he relies upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Uttar Pradesh and others vs. Babu Ram Upadhya, AIR 1961 SC 751.
6. On the other hand, learned Standing Counsel has vehemently opposed the writ petition.
