SRLNLVAS V Vs. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The only contention raised in this writ petition is that the petitioner having been acquitted in the criminal charges, could not have been punished in the departmental proceedings and, in any event, having regard to the judgment passed by the Criminal Court, the quantum of punishment must be held to be disproportionate to the charges of misconduct levelled against him.

(2.) There is no dispute that the petitioner was proceeded against simultaneously both in the criminal trial as also in the departmental proceedings. In the departmental proceedings, except refusing to cross-examine one witness on the ground that his defence would be disclosed, the. petitioner took part in the departmental proceedings without any demur whatsoever and cross-examined all other witnesses. He has not sought even for stay of the departmental proceedings on the ground that he would be prejudiced in the criminal trail if he is supposed to take part in the departmental proceedings.

(3.) The question, which arises for consideration, is whether at this stage the petitioner can be permitted to raise the aforementioned contentions.