KRISHAN CHAND Vs. STATE OF H.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) An FIR was lodged against the petitioner, under the provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. Copy of the FIR, registered against the petitioner under the aforesaid Act, is, annexed with this writ petition, as, Annexure P-2. On the score of the FIR, having come to be registered against the petitioner comprised, in, Annexure P-2, the petitioner was placed under suspension and a departmental inquiry was ordered to be initiated against the petitioner. The petitioner avers in the writ petition, that on 26.6.2013, petitioner made a representation to respondent No.3, comprised in Annexure P-4, wherein he has requested that the department proceedings be kept in abeyance or dropped, till the conclusion of criminal proceedings. However, the request of the petitioner was declined by a communication of 12.7.2013, addressed to the petitioner comprised, in, Annexure P-4. The order comprised in Annexure P-5, is extracted hereinafter:-

(2.) Against the aforesaid order, the petitioner preferred an appeal, before respondent No.2, comprised in Annexure P-6, which is still pending.

(3.) The respondents filed reply to the writ petition averring that the departmental inquiry initiated against the petitioner, has been initiated and is being conducted in accordance with the provisions laid down, in, the Punjab Police Rules 16.24, as, applicable to the State of Himachal Pradesh. It is further contended, that, the petitioner was given an adequate opportunity to defend himself during the course of the departmental inquiry. It is contended that there is no legal bar against the departmental inquiry as well as the criminal proceedings taking place simultaneously, as both have distinct and variant objectives.