JARNAIL SINGH Vs. STATE OF J&K AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard.

(2.) Common ground of both the sides is that the petitioner, a Government servant, was placed under suspension because of his involvement and arrest in a criminal case under section 376 RPC registered as FIR No. 77/2010 of Police Station, Mahore. It is admitted also that he had been getting subsistence allowance at the rate of 50 per cent of his salary. However, the respondents stopped the subsistence allowance after petitioner came to be convicted and sentenced in that criminal case by the trial court vide judgment dated 30.09.2016. It is not denied that petitioner has filed appeal against his conviction and sentence before this Court in Cr A No. 49/2016 and this Court vide order dated 18.10.2016 has ordered that petitioner shall be treated as under trial, which in effect means that the sentence has been stayed.

(3.) Whether payment of the subsistence allowance to the petitioner could have been stopped pursuant to and consequent upon his conviction and sentence, is the question raised in this writ petition. Such a question, however, is no more res integra in view of the Supreme Court judgment in State of Maharashtra v. Chandrabhan, AIR 1983 SC 803 . Paragraphs 20 and 23 of the judgment are important, which are reproduced: