TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (9) TMI 1698
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....service. 2. We have heard learned Counsel for the parties and perused the papers on record. 3. Brief facts of the case are that Appellant Baljinder Pal Kaur was Assistant Sub Inspector with Punjab Police. She was dismissed from service vide order dated 18.5.2005, after departmental enquiry was held and she was found guilty of charge that she took Rs. 8.00 lacs from one Gurjit Singh son of Bahadur Singh of District Ludhiana, and got him sent illegally to United States of America, with her husband Sukhdev Singh @ Sukha and three others. 4. From the papers on record, it reveals that apart from initiation of departmental enquiry, a First Information Report No. 81 was registered against the Appellant on 16.12.2003 with Vigilance Bureau,....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... learned Counsel for the Appellant on the decisions of this Court in Capt. M. Paul Anthony v. Bharat Gold Mines Ltd. and Anr. (1999) 3 SCC 679, G.M. Tank v. State of Gujarat and Ors. (2006) 5 SCC 446, and Jasbir Singh v. Punjab and Sind Bank and Ors. (2007) 1 SCC 566. 7. In paragraph 22 of Capt. M. Paul Anthony (supra), this Court has culled out following principles: (i) Departmental proceedings and proceedings in a criminal case can proceed simultaneously as there is no bar in their being conducted simultaneously, though separately. (ii) If the departmental proceedings and the criminal case are based on identical and similar set of facts and the charge in the criminal case against the delinquent employee is....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ses are of little help to the Appellant. 9. What is relevant in the present case which distinguishes the case of the Appellant from the above mentioned cases is Rule 16.3 of Punjab Police Rules, which reads as under: 16.3 Action following on a judicial acquittal: (1) When a Police Officer has been tried and acquitted by a criminal court he shall not be punished departmentally on the same charge or on a different charge upon the evidence cited in the criminal case, whether actually led or not, unless: (a) the criminal charge has failed on technical grounds; or (b) in the opinion of the court or of the Superintendent of Police, the prosecution witnesses have been won over; or ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t acquittals on merit.... 12. In Deputy Inspector General of Police and Anr. v. S. Samuthiram (2013) 1 SCC 598, this Court, in paragraph 26, has held as under: 26. As we have already indicated, in the absence of any provision in the service rules for reinstatement, if an employee is honourably acquitted by a criminal court, no right is conferred on the employee to claim any benefit including reinstatement. Reason is that the standard of proof required for holding a person guilty by a criminal court and the enquiry conducted by way of disciplinary proceeding is entirely different. In a criminal case, the onus of establishing the guilt of the accused is on the prosecution and if it fails to establish the guilt beyond reasona....