https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168909 Evidentiary rules barring police confessions in criminal trials do not control departmental enquiries, where misconduct may be proved on a preponderance of probability and by legally sufficient evidence. A confession made by a police employee in custody could therefore be relied on in the domestic enquiry once duly proved through the identification memo and witness testimony, without a valid showing that it was forged, fabricated, or retracted. Discharge in the criminal case did not bar disciplinary action on the same facts, and Rule 12 of the Delhi Police (Punishment and Appeal) Rules, 1987 did not apply to invalidate the dismissal founded on proved departmental misconduct. en-us Wed, 05 Apr 2006 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 25 Nov 2015 19:09:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168909 Evidentiary rules barring police confessions in criminal trials do not control departmental enquiries, where misconduct may be proved on a preponderance of probability and by legally sufficient evidence. A confession made by a police employee in custody could therefore be relied on in the domestic enquiry once duly proved through the identification memo and witness testimony, without a valid showing that it was forged, fabricated, or retracted. Discharge in the criminal case did not bar disciplinary action on the same facts, and Rule 12 of the Delhi Police (Punishment and Appeal) Rules, 1987 did not apply to invalidate the dismissal founded on proved departmental misconduct. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 05 Apr 2006 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168909