##PAGE1##

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

Reserved on: 13.11.2025

Pronounced on: 24.12.2025

+ W.P. (C) 83/2023

NEERAJ AGARWAL .....Petitioner

Through: Mr. Suresh Sharma, Adv.

versus

SECRETARY, DOPT AND OTHERS ....Respondents

Through: Mr.Rakesh Kumar, SPC with

Mr.Sunil, Adv. for UOI

Mr.Yash Narain, Adv. for CBI.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN CHAWLA

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MADHU JAIN

J U D G M E N T

MADHU JAIN, J.

1. The present writ petition has been filed challenging the Order

dated 20.12.2022 passed by the learned Central Administrative

Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as

‘Tribunal’), in O.A. No. 2796/2018, titled Sh. Neeraj Agarwal v.

Secretary, DOP&T & Ors., whereby the learned Tribunal dismissed

the O.A. filed by the petitioner herein, and held as under:

“14. In a catena of judgments, it has already

been held that Tribunals/Courts would

normally not undertake reappraisal of the

evidence in disciplinary proceedings. In this

case, the trap was laid by CBI by one of its

own officer and he was caught red handed.

Criminal case is already pending against him.

This situation more than any other situation

deserves invocation of Article 311(2) of the

Constitution of India and Rule 19(ii) of the

Signature Not Verified

Signed By:RENUKAW.P. (C)83/2023 Page1of13

NEGI

Signing Date:24.12.2025

15:46:24

CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965 as has been done in

thepresent case.

15. In view of the above, we find no infirmity

or illegality in the action of the respondents in

passing the impugned order dated 19.06.2018.

Thus, the present O.A. is devoid of merit and

thesameis accordinglydismissed.Nocosts.”

BRIEF FACTS:

2. The petitioner joined the Central Industrial Security Force

(CISF) as a Sub-Inspector on 01.10.1988. He, thereafter, served at

various CISF units, including NTPC Badarpur, Kishtwar/Dulhasti

(J&K), Group Headquarters, New Delhi, and CISF Unit, Bhilai, until

his selection on deputation to the Central Bureau of Investigation

(hereinafter referred to as ‘CBI’) as Inspector on 09.09.1999.

3. The petitioner continued to serve in the CBI and was

subsequently absorbed as an Inspector on 20.08.2008. His Annual

Performance Appraisal Reports for the years 2008-09 to 2013-14

recorded his performance as satisfactory. He was then promoted to the

post of Deputy Superintendent of Police on 20.01.2014, being posted

thereafter in the Banking Securities & Fraud Cell (BS&FC) of CBI,

Mumbai.

4. While posted in BS&FC, Mumbai, the petitioner was entrusted

with the investigation of several bank-fraud matters. The petitioner

claims that during this period, disputes arose between the petitioner

and the then Superintendent of Police (BS&FC), Respondent No.3,

regarding the mode of issuing and recording instructions in

investigations. According to the petitioner, he insisted that directions

be issued in writing in accordance with the Manual of Office

Signature Not Verified

Signed By:RENUKAW.P. (C)83/2023 Page2of13

NEGI

Signing Date:24.12.2025

15:46:24

Procedure issued by the administrative department of CBI, whereas

Respondent No.3 expected investigations to be conducted on verbal

instructions. This disagreement forms the background to the

petitioner’s allegations of mala fides against Respondent No.3.

5. On 22.04.2017, a complaint was received from one Shri Pradip

V. Shah, a retired Head Cashier of Bank of Baroda, alleging demand

and acceptance of illegal gratification by the petitioner. The complaint

was marked for verification on the same day, and an FIR being RC

BA1/2017/A0017 was registered. An alleged trap was laid on

23.04.2017, in which the petitioner was apprehended. He was arrested

on the same date and remained in judicial custody until 06.05.2017.

6. Consequent to the arrest, the petitioner was placed under

deemed suspension on 08.05.2017, which was periodically extended.

Parallelly, a criminal investigation into the FIR continued against the

petitioner herein.

7. In December 2017, the Disciplinary Authority initiated

proceedings under Article 311(2)(b) of the Constitution of India re