2023 (7) TMI 758 - HC - Indian Laws

Continuation of criminal proceedings when petitioner was exonerated in the departmental enquiry in the same set of allegation - Creation of false documents and drawing of monies by cheating the Government and misappropriation of Government funds. HELD THAT - On the basis of very same set of allegations, the proceedings i.e. both departmental as also criminal, were initiated against the petitioner. In so far as the departmental proceedings are concerned, it is evident from the material on record i.e. proceedings of the Director of Public Health and Family Welfare dated 10.01.2022 that the Charge referred to above, was dropped pursuant to a report submitted by the Inquiry Officer. In such circumstances, continuation of criminal proceedings with reference to the very same set of allegations, is not legally sustainable. In Radheshyam Kerjiwal s case 2011 (2) TMI 154 - SUPREME COURT , the Hon ble Supreme Court was dealing with an issue with regard to impact of the findings recorded in adjudication proceedings under the provisions of Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1947 on criminal proceedings, and whether in case in the adjudication proceedings, the person concerned is exonerated, can he ask for dropping of the criminal proceedings on that ground. The said issue was answered by a majority of 2 1 in favour of the appellant before the Hon ble Supreme Court, inter alia holding that in the case of the findings by the Enforcement Directorate in the adjudication proceedings that there is no contravention of the provisions of the Act, it would be unjust and abuse of process of the Court to permit the Enforcement Directorate to continue with the criminal prosecution. In Ashoo Surendranath Tewari s case 2020 (9) TMI 1150 - SUPREME COURT a three member Bench of the Hon ble Supreme Court, while referring the above said ratio laid down in Radheshyam Kerjiwal, set aside the Judgment of the High Court and that of the Special Judge and discharged the appellant therein from the offences under the Penal Code. The conclusion reached in the above said case was based on the Central Vigilance Commission s (CVS) order which was in favour of the appellant and chances of conviction in a criminal Trial involving the same facts appear to be bleak. This Court is of the opinion that the aforesaid judgments would squarely applies to the case of the petitioner. As the petitioner was exonerated in the departmental enquiry, continuation of proceedings in respect of same set of allegations is nothing but abuse of process of Court - Petition allowed.

Summary

Issues:
Petition to quash criminal proceedings based on exoneration in departmental proceedings.

Analysis:
1. The petitioner filed a Criminal Petition seeking to quash the proceedings in a case involving multiple accused and various offenses under the IPC.
2. The petitioner, Accused No.11, was implicated in the case for misappropriation of funds along with others, based on a complaint by the Sub-Treasury Officer.
3. The petitioner argued that departmental proceedings were initiated against him, and he was exonerated in those proceedings, indicating the allegations were not proved.
4. The petitioner contended that continuing criminal prosecution on the same allegations after exoneration in departmental proceedings would be an abuse of the legal process.
5. The Assistant Public Prosecutor argued that departmental and criminal proceedings are distinct, and exoneration in one does not bar continuation of the other.
6. The key question before the Court was whether the criminal proceedings against the petitioner should be quashed considering the exoneration in the departmental proceedings.
7. Detailed examination of the Charges framed in both departmental and criminal proceedings revealed identical allegations against the petitioner regarding misappropriation of funds.
8. Citing the Supreme Court's decision in Radheshyam Kejriwal's case, the Court emphasized that exoneration in departmental proceedings on merits could warrant quashing of criminal proceedings to prevent abuse of the legal process.
9. Referring to the principles laid down in various judgments, including the need for identical allegations and exoneration on merits, the Court found that the petitioner's case met the criteria for quashing criminal proceedings.
10. The Court concluded that as the petitioner was exonerated in the departmental inquiry, continuing the criminal proceedings on the same allegations would amount to an abuse of the legal process.
11. Applying the guidelines set by the Supreme Court, the Court quashed the criminal proceedings against the petitioner, Accused No.11, in the case before the Judicial Magistrate.

This comprehensive analysis of the judgment highlights the legal intricacies involved in considering whether to quash criminal proceedings based on exoneration in departmental proceedings, emphasizing the need to prevent abuse of the legal process and uphold principles of justice.