VED PARKASH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, who was an exemptee Head Constable and posted in the office of C.I. A-1, Ambala has filed the present petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing charge-sheet dated 1.10.2006 (Annexure P-1). Prayer has also been made for issuance of a writ of mandamus, directing the respondents to reinstate him in service and grant all the consequential reliefs.

(2.) The facts of the case are that the petitioner joined the Haryana Police as a Constable on 12.4.1989. He was promoted as exemptee Head Constable in July, 2005 after he had put in 15 years of service. On 22.9.2006, FIR No. 58 was registered at Police Station State Vigilance Bureau, Ambala City, under Section 7/13 of the Prevention of Corruption Act. The petitioner was arrested in the said FIR and placed under suspension with effect from 22.9.2006 by an order passed by Superintendent of Police, Ambala on 26.9.2006. After investigation of the criminal case, final report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. has since been submitted. The charges against the petitioner have also been framed in the FIR in question and the case now fixed for 24.9.2007 for recording of prosecution evidence. During the pendency of the aforementioned criminal case, impugned charge-sheet date 1.10.2006 has been upon the petitioner for holding a departmental enquiry.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that continuance of departmental enquiry would tantamount to pre-judging the guilt of the petitioner, which would be established in the criminal case. In case the petitioner is proceeded against departmentally, he would be compelled to disclose his defence. Moreover, principal witnesses as cited in support of the charge-sheet (Annexure P-1) are the same as cited in the list of witnesses in the criminal case. Pleading that the departmental enquiry is in violation of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India and against the principles of natural of justice, it has been contended that the same is liable to be set aside and in any case stayed, during the pendency of criminal proceedings.