Departmental exoneration on merits can bar criminal prosecution on the same allegations, making further proceedings an abuse of process.

Where departmental proceedings and criminal prosecution arise from the same allegations, exoneration on merits in the enquiry can bar continuation of the criminal case if the charges were not established on the material. The enquiry officer found the employee not guilty, the disciplinary authority accepted that finding, and earlier government orders had exonerated the employee and directed withdrawal of investigation. Applying the different standards of proof in disciplinary and criminal proceedings, the Court treated further prosecution on the same facts as unjust and an abuse of process. The criminal proceedings were therefore liable to be quashed.

---

---

Issues: Whether criminal proceedings arising from the same allegations could be permitted to continue after the petitioner was exonerated on merits in the departmental enquiry.

Analysis: The departmental proceedings and the criminal case arose from the same incident and allegations. The Inquiry Officer found the petitioner not guilty, the disciplinary authority accepted that report, and the material showed that the charges were not established on merits. The governing principle applied was that departmental proceedings are decided on preponderance of probability, whereas criminal prosecution requires proof beyond reasonable doubt. Where identical allegations are not proved on merits in departmental enquiry, continuation of the criminal case on the same facts would be unjust and an abuse of process. The Court also treated the later internal communication as incapable of overriding the earlier Government orders exonerating the petitioner and directing withdrawal of investigation.

Conclusion: The criminal proceedings could not be continued and were liable to be quashed in favour of the petitioner.

---