TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2012 (11) TMI 1345
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....an Public Service Commission (R.P.S.C.) for the post of Assistant Public Prosecutor Grade II. He served on the said post till 28th July, 1980. On the very next day, i.e. 29th July, 1980, he was selected for appointment to the Rajasthan Judicial Service and joined as Judicial Magistrate First Class. For sometime, he remained posted at Banswara as Judicial Magistrate. During this period, his judgments were graded as above average and integrity as "beyond doubt". In the inspection report, it was further remarked that "his behaviour with members of the Bar, litigants and the persons coming to the Court needs improvement". It appears that he was not on best of terms with the local Bar, which led to his transfer. 4. On 24th November, 1985, at about 10.30 p.m., a dead body was found near Ajmer Pulia on the railway track in the city of Jaipur. The dead body was identified as that of one Mr. Suresh Chand Gupta, Advocate. A 'Marag' (death) case was registered on 24th November, 1985, at Serial No. 35/85 at Police Station GRP, Jaipur. It appears that the local bar association of which the deceased was a member protested that proper investigation was not being conducted about the man....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r had sought time to get the case diary from the Investigating Officer. I am in the court for last 15 minutes, but the entry to the Court has been blocked by the advocates and others. It is for the members of the August profession to consider how far it is justified. The advocate for the Petitioner could not come to the court because of that blockade. Hence the case cannot be taken up. I have no option but to retire to the Chamber. The case is adjourned to January 2, 1986. Sd/- Sharma, M.B. 6. Thereafter, the High Court was closed for winter break on 21st December, 1985. On 20th December, 1985, the Petitioner was formally arrested and taken into custody by the police (CBI, Jaipur). He was placed under suspension on 22nd December, 1985 w.e.f. 20th December, 1985. Since the Petitioner had already been arrested, the anticipatory bail application was dismissed as having become infructuous on 2nd January, 1986. In view of the volatile atmosphere, the Petitioner apprehended that he would not get a fair trial in the Criminal Case No. 3/86 pending before the Sessions Judge, Jaipur against him. He, therefore, approached this Court with a prayer for transfer of the criminal trial. By O....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....quiry proceedings were in progress against the Petitioner. Therefore, this Court directed the High Court to complete the enquiry within a period of eight weeks and submit its report. 10. The enquiry was duly completed. In the Enquiry Report dated 27th February, 2008, the Petitioner was exonerated of the charges levelled against him. It was only at that stage, that he was reinstated with immediate effect, by order dated 26th March, 2008. The orders passed by the Respondent were placed on the record of these proceedings with the affidavit dated 22nd April, 2008 filed by the Registrar (Writs). The Petitioner was, thereafter, given the posting order at Vijai Nagar on 12th May, 2008. He retired from service on attaining the age of superannuation on 30th June, 2008. 11. It appears that the trials and tribulations of the Petitioner did not come to an end, even after retirement. In fact on 24th January, 2009, an order was issued on the basis of the resolution passed by the Full Court in its meeting held on 29th November, 2008, wherein it was resolved as under: RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT, JODHPUR ORDER No. Estt. (RJS) 15/2009 Date: 24.01.2009 WHEREAS SHRI GURPAL SING....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....bruary, 2009. After the amendment, the counter affidavit was filed by the Respondents to the amended writ petition. The matter was heard by this Court on a number of occasions. On 5th April, 2011, this Court passed the following order: Having regard to the facts of the case, this Court is of the opinion that interest of justice would be served if the High Court is given an opportunity to pass appropriate orders under Rule 54 of the Rules. Therefore, the matter is remitted to the High Court on its administrative side to pass appropriate orders under Rule 54. The High Court shall issue notice to the Petitioner and afford him an opportunity of hearing by calling upon him to file reply to the notice. The High Court shall thereafter consider the reply and pass a reasoned order under Rule 54 of the Rules of 1951. This exercise shall be completed as early as possible and without any avoidable delay but in any case not later than six weeks from today. The High Court to file the order which may be passed by it in the present proceedings. 13. Pursuant to the aforesaid direction, it appears that a Committee was constituted by the Rajasthan High Court (hereinafter referred to as &#....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rtly justified or wholly unjustified would have to be seen in the light of result of not only the trial in criminal case but also of the departmental enquiry where the Petitioner was proceeded against by the department. According to the learned senior counsel, whilst taking a decision under Rule 54 of the 1951 Rules, the disciplinary authority was required to keep in mind the outcome of the criminal trial and the departmental proceeding. 19. Relying on some judgments of this Court, Mr. Calla had submitted that an employee who is suspended due to the pendency of the criminal investigation/trial has to be reinstated upon acquittal. Further upon reinstatement, he would be entitled to full salary and allowances for the period he is kept under suspension. According to the learned senior counsel, an acquittal either by trial court or by the appellate court would relate back to the date on which the order of suspension was passed. Mr. Calla then submitted that in the facts of this case, the Petitioner was suspended due to the registration of the criminal case against him. At the time when the Petitioner was acquitted he was entitled to be reinstated. However, since an appeal was filed ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ndia and Ors. (1987) 4 SCC 328, R.P. Kapur v. Union of India and Anr. (1964) 5 SCR 431, Commissioner of Police, New Delhi v. Narender Singh (2006) 4 SCC 265, Corporation of the City of Nagpur, Civil Lines, Nagpur and Anr. v. Ramchandra and Ors. (1981) 2 SCC 714, Jasbir Singh v. Punjab & Sind Bank and Ors. (2007) 1 SCC 566, The Divisional Superintendent, Northern Railway and Anr. v. R.B. Hanifi (1976) Lab. I.C. 1403, Govind Prasad v. Union of India (1980) RLW 258, Union of India and Ors. v. K.V. Jankiraman and Ors. (1991) 4 SCC 109, Union of India and Ors. v. Sangram Keshari Nayak (2007) 6 SCC 704, Sulekh Chand & Salek Chand v. Commissioner of Police and Ors. 1994 Supp (3) SCC 674, State of Kerala and Ors. v. E.K. Bhaskaran Pillai (2007) 6 SCC 524, Union of India and Ors. v. Lt. Gen. Rajendra Singh Kadyan and Anr. (2000) 6 SCC 698. 21. Mr. Pallav Shishodia, learned senior counsel on behalf of Respondent No. 1, sought dismissal of the present writ petition, inter-alia, on the ground of delay. It was pointed out that there is a delay of more than 20 years in challenging the order of suspension dated 20th December, 1985. The learned senior counsel, in response to submissions of Mr. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....harged with public duty of administration of justice. 24. The learned Counsel had further submitted that whatever amount was legally due to the Petitioner has already been paid to him. It had been stated that Rupees Twelve Lac Seventy Three Thousand Eight Hundred Forty Two Only, i.e. Rs. 12,73,842/-, have been paid to the Petitioner under various heads, like dearness allowance, subsistence allowance, etc. Also, the Petitioner gets a monthly pension to the tune of Rupees Twenty Two Thousand Three Hundred Eighty Five Only, i.e. Rs. 22,385/-. The counsel relied upon the following judgments to substantiate his contentions: Management of Reserve Bank of India, New Delhi v. Bhopal Singh Panchal (1994) 1 SCC 541, Krishnakant Raghunath Bibhavnekar v. State of Maharashtra and Ors. (1997) 3 SCC 636, K. Ponnamma (Smt.) v. State of Kerala and Ors. (1997) 9 SCC 36, Dhananjay v. Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Parishad, Jalna (2003) 2 SCC 386, Union of India and Ors. v. Jaipal Singh (2004) 1 SCC 121, Baldev Singh v. Union of India and Ors. (2005) 8 SCC 747, N. Selvaraj v. Kumbakonam City Union Bank Ltd. and Anr. (2006) 9 SCC 172, Banshi Dhar v. State of Rajasthan and Anr. (2007) 1 ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s decreed but the appellate court held that the Bank failed to prove that the Appellant had withdrawn or embezzled the said sum. It was held that the Bank was not entitled to recover the said amount. That judgment was not challenged. Thus, the same attained finality. However, the writ petition filed by the Appellant, challenging the disciplinary proceedings and the order of punishment was dismissed by the Punjab and Haryana High Court. Without taking note of the decision of civil court and relying on a provision of the Bipartite Settlement, the High Court held that the departmental proceedings could have been initiated even after the judgment of acquittal in the criminal case. The Appellant employee then filed an appeal in this Court. Allowing the appeal, this Court held that the Respondent Bank invited findings of a competent civil court on the issue as to whether the Appellant had committed any embezzlement or not. Embezzlement of fund was the principal charge against the Appellant in all the proceedings. The Respondent Bank failed to prove any of the charges before any court of law. The judgment in civil matter having attained finality, was binding on the Respondent Bank. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... at the initial stage, when he had remained in police custody for more than forty eight hours, though unfortunately for circumstances for which he was not responsible. This suspension was naturally continued when he was facing the trial for murder. 33. The next stage is when he was acquitted by the trial court on 1st May, 2002. The observations made by the Additional Session Judge, Delhi whilst acquitting the Petitioner are as follows: 285. The case in hand does not pass the muster. The circumstances that can be safely held as duly proved would include only that there was long-standing friendship between the accused and the deceased, and discovery of dead body of the latter in circumstances indicating unnatural death. The prosecution has failed to prove beyond all reasonable doubts the theory of accused having taken an amount of Rs. one lakh 20 thousand from the deceased on the promise of helping him in securing appointment as Member in Board of Revenue, or upon failure faced by the deceased in getting the said appointment refusing to, or haggling over, return of the said amount of money. The theory of accused having returned Rs. one lakh to PW 1 after the incident is s....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....fluence of certain elements inimically placed vis-à-vis the accused". These observations, in our opinion, would bring the present case within the realm of those cases which are often described as cases of "no evidence". Merely because the Court ultimately used the term that prosecution has failed to prove the case "beyond reasonable doubt" would not raise the stature of the evidence, produced by the prosecution, in this case from the level of being thoroughly unreliable. 34. As noticed above, Mr. Calla has submitted that the suspension of the Petitioner should have been revoked at this stage. It will not be possible to accept the proposition that as soon as the trial court had acquitted the Petitioner, the Rajasthan High Court was required to forthwith revoke the order of suspension. Undoubtedly, the Petitioner could have been given a non-sensitive posting, not involving judicial functions. But, it was not imperative for the High Court to revoke the suspension, at that stage. It is a matter of record, that the prosecution agency decided to file an appeal against the judgment and order passed by the trial court, acquitting the Petitioner. The appeal filed by the CBI was ad....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... trust. Society is, therefore, entitled to expect that a Judge must be a man of high integrity, honesty and required to have moral vigour, ethical firmness and impervious to corrupt or venial influences. He is required to keep most exacting standards of propriety in judicial conduct. Any conduct which tends to undermine public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the court would be deleterious to the efficacy of judicial process. Society, therefore, expects higher standards of conduct and rectitude from a Judge...... It is, therefore, a basic requirement that a Judge's official and personal conduct be free from impropriety; the same must be in tune with the highest standard of propriety and probity. The standard of conduct is higher than that expected of a layman and also higher than that expected of an advocate. In fact, even his private life must adhere to high standards of probity and propriety, higher than those deemed acceptable for others. Therefore, the Judge can ill-afford to seek shelter from the fallen standard in the society. 37. The decision of the High Court to keep the Petitioner under suspension has to be judged by keeping the aforesaid standards....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the CFSL report, Ex.PW-34/DA proves existence of alcohol in the stomach of the deceased. This tends to support the accident theory. 45. The third step was to prove that the prosecution had recovered incriminating articles, either following the disclosure statement or on its own initiative. The prosecution has failed even at doing the same. In this situation, even if the prosecution is able to prove existence of motive, the same by itself would not be of any value. The trial court has disbelieved the story of motive. However, for us it is not necessary to go into those details. 46. ...The prosecution has failed to prove firstly that there was any murder and secondly that the accused is the one who committed it. There is absolutely no merit in the appeal and the same is accordingly dismissed. 39. The acquittal of the Petitioner having been affirmed by the High Court of Delhi, in our opinion, it was necessary for the High Court of Rajasthan to take a decision: (a) whether to revoke the order of suspension and permit the Petitioner to perform judicial functions; (b) whether to hold a departmental enquiry with regard to the receipt of money allegedly received by hi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....present writ petition immediately after the order of acquittal was upheld by the Delhi High Court. The enquiry proceedings were completed during the pendency of the writ petition. Undoubtedly, the order of suspension was revoked by the High Court on 26th March, 2008 but without giving any direction as to how the period of suspension was to be treated. It was only subsequently that the matter with regard to regularization of his period of suspension was considered by the Full Court in the meeting held on 29th November, 2008. Even at that stage though the Full Court passed a resolution that period of suspension shall be treated as period spent on duty, but it was to be without payment of any salary except for the subsistence allowance already paid to him. On the basis of the aforesaid resolution, the High Court passed the order dated 24th January, 2009. So even by order dated 24th January, 2009, the Petitioner was granted only partial relief. This necessitated the amendment of the writ petition by the Petitioner questioning the legality of the aforesaid order. It was only at that stage that this Court by order dated 5th April, 2011 directed the High Court to pass appropriate orders u....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the date on which he would have normally been promoted but for the disciplinary/criminal proceedings. 45. In this case, it is a matter of record that upon exoneration in the departmental enquiry, the Petitioner was reinstated in service. No punishment was inflicted on him at all. However, during the pendency of the criminal trial as also the departmental proceedings, he was not considered for promotion, when the cases of persons junior to him were considered. In our opinion, the High Court erred in directing in the Full Court Resolution dated 29th November, 2008, and the communication dated 24th January, 2009 that the Petitioner shall not be entitled for any promotion. 46. We, therefore, partly allow the writ petition. We reject the submissions of Mr. Calla that the suspension of the Petitioner was rendered wholly unjustified upon acquittal by the trial court. We also reject the submissions of Mr. Calla that the suspension of the Petitioner was wholly unjustified during the pendency of the appeal before the High Court. We, however, hold that the continued suspension of the Petitioner during the pendency of the departmental proceedings was wholly unjustified. The Petitioner is....