MUSADDIQUE HUSSAIN Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Shri S. Borthakur, learned counsel for the petitioner.

(2.) The instant writ petition has been filed with a prayer for stay of a disciplinary proceeding on the ground that on identical charge, a criminal case is instituted in which the petitioner is an accused. It is the case of the petitioner that while he was serving as a Sub- Inspector of Police (Un-Armed Branch) at the Special Branch, Assam at Kahilipara in connection with the Basistha Police Station Case No. 416/2021 under Sec. 22(C)/29 of the NDPS Act, the petitioner was arrested on 11/3/2021 and consequent thereupon he was placed under suspension on 12/3/2021. The petitioner was subsequently released on bail on 17/6/2021 and thereafter on 12/7/2021 he was served with a show cause notice whereby a disciplinary proceeding was initiated against him. It is pertinent to note that on 19/7/2021 the petitioner was reinstated in service.

(3.) Shri Borthakur, the learned counsel for the petitioner by drawing the attention of this Court to the charge memo as well as the Forwarding Report has contended that the allegation is the same in which even the documents and the witnesses would be the same. The learned counsel has placed reliance in the case of Capt. M. Paul Anthony Vs. Bharat Gold Mines Ltd. and anr. reported in (1999) 3 SCC 679 as well as the subsequent decision of the Stanzen Toyotetsu India Private Limited Vs. Girish V. and Ors. reported in (2014) 3 SCC 636 and has contended that under similar circumstances, the Hon'ble Supreme Court had laid down that interest of justice would be served if the disciplinary proceeding is stayed. Shri Borthakur however fairly admitted that there is no legal bar for both the proceedings to proceed simultaneously.