SHIVAKAR SINGH Vs. STATE OF U. P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard.

(2.) Correction application is allowed. Necessary correction has been incorporated in the order dtd. 6/2/2025. The correct order shall read as under:

(3.) Briefly put the prosecution case in the F.I.R. was that the petitioner had demanded bribes for electricity connection from a consumer. The petitioner was thereafter confined to jail from 23/1/2015 to 18/12/2018 during the course of the trial. The petitioner did not discharge his duties for the aforesaid period of three years. Admittedly, the criminal case was not instituted at the behest of the respondent-corporation. The respondent-corporation who is the employer of the petitioner did not create any hindrance nor prevented the petitioner from working on his post. No departmental proceedings were taken out against the petitioner by the respondent-corporation/his employer in the said case.