2014 (11) TMI 997

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....3 Cr.P.C. Aggrieved, petitioner has preferred the present revision. 2. In dismissing the complaint, learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai informed that these prima facie must be a criminal act of the accused in furtherance of common intention or that they should have been indulged in a criminal act by entering into an agreement between themselves. He found that no such allegation was made against the accused, that the complainant had not stated that the accused have acted with common intention or committed any illegal act. It was seen that the primary allegation of the complainant was that she had not been given promotion in the year 1997 on the ground that she was not yet fit for promotion whereas her juniors had bee....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... having moved the first against denial of promotion to her and the second against disciplinary proceedings initiated against her. Orders have been passed in both OAs in her favour and the challenge thereto in writ proceedings had been negated. The relevant observations in the orders in O.A. Nos. 1353 and 1354 of 2011, dated 27-3-2013 [2013 (291) E.L.T. 500 (CAT)], which form the basis of the petitioner's accusation of commission of criminal offences are as follows : "12. A careful perusal of the impugned order dated 27-7-2011 and the facts and circumstances of the case reveals that in the name of disciplinary proceedings pending against the applicant the respondents have been harassing the applicant without promotion and failed to proceed ....