Disciplinary action cannot stand after a clear acquittal on merits where the core allegations lack evidence.

A disciplinary reference based on allegations of fictitious bank accounts and sales tax evasion could not be sustained after the criminal court recorded a clear acquittal on merits for want of evidence on the core allegations. The acquittal was not treated as a benefit-of-doubt result, but as a finding that the foundational facts were not proved. In those circumstances, the disciplinary authority could not rely on the same factual basis without independent material, and the disciplinary recommendation was rejected.

---

---

Issues: Whether the disciplinary reference against the respondent should be accepted despite the respondent's acquittal by the criminal court on the same underlying allegations.

Analysis: The reference arose from allegations that the respondent had opened bank accounts in fictitious names and used them in connection with transactions said to involve evasion of sales tax. The criminal court, however, acquitted the respondent on the ground that there was no evidence to show that he had opened the bank accounts or committed the offences alleged. The acquittal was treated as a clear acquittal on merits and not a case where benefit of doubt was extended. In these circumstances, the disciplinary recommendation based on the same factual foundation could not be sustained.

Conclusion: The reference was not accepted and the disciplinary recommendation was rejected.

Final Conclusion: The matter ended with refusal to act on the disciplinary recommendation, resulting in dismissal of the reference in favour of the respondent.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the criminal court records a clear acquittal on the basis of absence of evidence on the core allegation, the disciplinary authority cannot sustain a contrary finding on the same foundational facts without independent material.

---