https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=450493 The Bombay HC allowed a petition challenging disciplinary proceedings against a Central Excise Superintendent. The petitioner faced compulsory retirement and reduced pension benefits based on confessional statements linking him to 1993 Mumbai bomb blasts. The HC held that confessional statements made during criminal investigation, where the employee wasn't tried as co-accused and accusers later retracted statements, cannot form sufficient evidence for departmental proceedings. Under Evidence Act Sections 25-26 and CrPC Sections 161-162, police statements cannot be proved in trial. Even under TADA Act Section 15, confessions are admissible against co-accused only if charged and tried together. The HC found no evidence beyond inadmissible confessional statements to prove charges, constituting a case of "no evidence" warranting judicial review intervention. en-us Mon, 04 Mar 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 06 Mar 2024 21:10:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=450493 The Bombay HC allowed a petition challenging disciplinary proceedings against a Central Excise Superintendent. The petitioner faced compulsory retirement and reduced pension benefits based on confessional statements linking him to 1993 Mumbai bomb blasts. The HC held that confessional statements made during criminal investigation, where the employee wasn't tried as co-accused and accusers later retracted statements, cannot form sufficient evidence for departmental proceedings. Under Evidence Act Sections 25-26 and CrPC Sections 161-162, police statements cannot be proved in trial. Even under TADA Act Section 15, confessions are admissible against co-accused only if charged and tried together. The HC found no evidence beyond inadmissible confessional statements to prove charges, constituting a case of "no evidence" warranting judicial review intervention. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 04 Mar 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=450493