Acquittal in a criminal trial does not automatically bar or quash departmental enquiry proceedings, as both operate under different standards of proof—criminal cases requiring proof beyond reasonable doubt, while disciplinary proceedings rely on the principle of preponderance of probability.

Order on Board

1. With the consent of the parties, the matter is heard finally.

2. The petitioner has preferred this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking following relief(s):-

“10.1 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue an appropriate writ/order, thereby setting-aside/quashing the impugned order dated 13.03.2023 and 25.04.2023 (Annexure-P/1) and further be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to keep the departmental enquiry proceedings against the petitioner in abeyance till the conclusion of criminal trial pending against the petitioner.

10.2 That, any other relief/order which may deem fit and just in the facts and circumstances of the case including award of the costs of the petition may be given.”

3. Facts of the case, in brief are that, in the year 2022, the petitioner was posted as a Constable under the respondent authority in the 20th Battalion, Chhattisgarh Armed Forces, Parsada Distt. Mahasamund (CG). During his posting, on 24.11.2022, an FIR was lodged by the victim/prosecutrix at Police Station Arjuni, Distt. Dhmatari (CG) alleging that the petitioner had committed rape upon her on the pretext of marriage. Based on which, Crime No.374/22 was registered against him for the offence under Sections 417, 376 and 506 IPC and after completion of investigation, charge sheet was filed against him before competent Court. Subsequently, vide Order dated 13.3.2023 (Annexure-P/1) passed by respondent No.2, departmental enquiry proceedings were initiated against the petitioner on the basis of aforesaid allegations, which led to filing of instant petition by the petitioner.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in respect of aforesaid FIR, a criminal charge sheet was filed by Police of Police Station Arjuni, Distt. Dhamtari before the concerned Sessions Court, which was registered as Sessions Case No.05/2023. Charges under Section 417, 376 and 506 Part-II IPC were framed against the petitioner and after full trial, the petitioner has been acquitted of the above charges. Learned counsel further submits that the charges in both the cases, i.e. criminal case and departmental enquiry, are based on the same set of facts and same set of evidence. Since the petitioner has already been acquitted after a full trial vide judgment dated 30.06.2023 passed by the learned Upper Sessions Judge (FTC), Dhamtari, it is contended that no departmental enquiry can be continued on the very same allegations. Hence, it is prayed that the Order dated 13.03.2023 (Annexure P/1) initiating departmental proceedings, along with all consequential proceedings, be quashed.

5. During the course of submission, learned counsel for the petitioner produced a copy of the aforesaid judgment passed by the learned Upper Sessions Judge, Dhamtari in Criminal Session Case No.05/2023, but the same has not been filed by the petitioner on record, therefore, copy of the judgment filed by the petitioner is directed to be taken on record and treated as part of the record.

6. The State has filed its reply. Learned counsel appearing for the State, referring to its reply, submits that though the petitioner has been acquitted in the criminal case, a perusal of the judgment passed by the learned Sessions Court shows that the victim/prosecutrix, her mother, father and sister have categorically deposed that the petitioner had sexually exploited the prosecutrix on several occasions on the pretext of marriage. He further submits that there is no legal bar to conduct departmental enquiry even if the delinquent employee has been acquitted by the Criminal Court, because, standard of proof of evidence is completel