SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE D.I. KHAN and others vs IHSANULLAH
This matter arises from a petition directed against the judgment of the NWFP Service Tribunal which had allowed the respondent civil servant's appeal and reinstated him into service without back benefits following his acquittal in a criminal case. The core legal question was whether the acquittal of a civil servant in a criminal case automatically entitles him to reinstatement and whether departmental proceedings are independent of criminal proceedings. The Supreme Court held that the acquittal of a civil servant from criminal charges has no bearing on departmental disciplinary proceedings, which must be conducted independently according to service rules, and that a belated appeal based on such acquittal is not sustainable. The key principle laid down is that criminal acquittal does not bar or influence independent departmental disciplinary action, and a service appeal filed after an inordinate delay following dismissal cannot be entertained.
- Does the acquittal of a civil servant from criminal charges have any bearing on independent disciplinary proceedings?
- Can a service tribunal reinstate a civil servant solely on the basis of a subsequent acquittal in a criminal trial when the departmental appeal is barred by limitation?
ORDER
Abdul Hameed Dogar, J.--This petition is directed against judgment dated 10.5.2005 passed by learned NWFP Service Tribunal, camp at D.I.Khan whereby Appeal No. 180 of 2004 filed by respondent was allowed and he was reinstated into service without back benefits.
2. Brief facts leading to the filing of instant petition are that respondent was dismissed from service on the allegation that on 12.7.2001 he was found in possession of 225 grams of charas. Case was registered against him in which he was arrested and sent up to face the trial. According to learned counsel for the respondent he made representation to the competent authority but did avail the remedy of filing appeal before the learned Tribunal challenging his dismissal. According to him after his acquittal from the criminal case which took place on 9.10.2003 he filed instant appeal before Tribunal on 18.3.2004 mainly on the ground that he was acquitted from criminal charges as such be reinstated in service The appeal before the Tribunal was filed belatedly from date of his dismissal and after five months from the date of his acquittal from the criminal charges. This being so, respondent has lost his right and cannot agitate for reinstatement. By now it is the settled principle of law that acquittal of civil servant from criminal charges would have absolutely no bearing on the merits of the case as the disciplinary proceedings are to be initiated according to service rules independently. Reliance can be made to the cases of Executive Engineer and others Vs. Zahid Sharif (2005 SCM R 824) wherein is has been held that acquittal of civil servant from Court would not impose any bar for initiation of disciplinary proceedings as his acquittal would have no bearing on disciplinary proceedings at all. In case of Sami Ullah Vs. Inspector General of Police and others (2006 SCM R 554) it has been held that acquittal of petitioner from criminal case would have absolutely no bearing on the merits of the case and in the case of NED University of Engineering and Technology Vs. Syed Ashfaq Hussain Shah , (2006 SCM R 453) it has been held that departmental representation of civil servant was barred by limitation and on the basis of such representation Service Tribunal could not reinstate him in service.
3. In view of what has been discussed here in above and the case law referred supra the impugned judgment reinstating the respondent in service after acquittal from the criminal charge is not sustainable in law hence the same is set aside. The petition is converted into appeal and allowed.
The order of dismissal from service of respondent is maintained.