Suspension pay after acquittal with benefit of doubt depends on regulations and manual guidance, not automatic full exoneration.

Suspension pay and allowances for an officer acquitted with benefit of doubt were addressed under the bank's regulations and manual. Regulation 15(1) applied only where the officer was fully exonerated or the suspension was unjustifiable; otherwise Regulation 15(2) governed and left the proportion of pay and allowances to the competent authority. Clause 22(8) of the Manual specifically dealt with acquittal in criminal proceedings and was treated as relevant guidance for applying Regulation 15(2). On that footing, acquittal with benefit of doubt did not amount to full exoneration, and the High Court's relief was upheld.

---

---

Issues: Whether the respondent, an officer suspended in connection with a criminal case and later acquitted with benefit of doubt, was entitled to full pay and allowances for the suspension period under the applicable bank regulations or only to such proportion of pay and allowances as directed by the competent authority.

Analysis: Suspension was ordered under Regulation 12(1)(b) in view of the criminal case. Regulation 15(1) applies where the officer is fully exonerated or the suspension is unjustifiable, while Regulation 15(2) governs all other cases and leaves the proportion of pay and allowances to the competent authority. Clause 22(8) of the Manual specifically dealt with acquittal in criminal proceedings and, on the facts, operated as a guide for applying Regulation 15(2). The Manual was treated as relevant for the pay-and-allowances question, and the respondent's acquittal with benefit of doubt did not place him in the category of full exoneration.

Conclusion: The respondent was entitled to benefits under the manual and regulations as interpreted by the Court, and the High Court was in granting relief; the appellant's challenge failed.

---