1997 (3) TMI 569 - SC - Indian Laws

Offence involving moral turpitude - Whether the appellant had the jurisdiction to suspend the respondent? - Held that - Appeal allowed. High Court was not justified in quashing the orders of suspension. Unable to agree with the contention of the respondent that there has been no application of mind or the objective consideration of the facts by the appellant before it passed the orders of suspension. As already observed the very fact that the investigation was conducted by the C.B.I which resulted in the filing of a charge-sheet alleging various offences having been committed by the respondent was sufficient for the appellant to conclude that pending prosecution the respondent should be suspended

Summary

Issues:
Suspension order pending prosecution, Jurisdiction of the management to suspend an employee for an offence involving moral turpitude, Definition of moral turpitude, Application of mind by the management before passing suspension order.

Analysis:

The Supreme Court heard an appeal from the Allahabad High Court's judgment, which had quashed a suspension order against the respondent pending prosecution for criminal misconduct and cheating. The respondent, a bank employee, was charged based on allegations of fraudulent activities involving forging cheques and withdrawing money wrongfully. The High Court held that entering into a criminal conspiracy did not necessarily constitute an offence involving moral turpitude, thus questioning the jurisdiction of the bank to suspend the respondent. The appellant contended that the respondent's actions did constitute an offence involving moral turpitude, justifying the suspension. The Court referred to the First Bipartite Settlement clauses, stating that if an employee commits an offence involving moral turpitude, the bank can prosecute and suspend the employee. The Court defined moral turpitude as conduct inherently base or depraved. It emphasized that forgery and wrongful withdrawal of money by a bank employee would qualify as an offence involving moral turpitude.

The Court cited previous cases to explain the concept of moral turpitude, highlighting conduct contrary to justice, honesty, or good morals. The Court found the respondent's alleged actions met the criteria for moral turpitude, justifying the suspension. It rejected the argument that the bank did not apply its mind before suspending the respondent, emphasizing the seriousness of the charges and the need to prevent further misconduct. The Court concluded that the bank had the authority to suspend the respondent based on the allegations and the pending prosecution. The Court overturned the High Court's decision, reinstating the suspension order and dismissing the respondent's writ petition.