Rajasthan High Court Quashes Second Charge-Sheet Against Retired Employee, Upholds Double Jeopardy Principle
The Court directs the release of retiral dues with interest, emphasizing the impermissibility of second inquiries on identical charges.
In a significant ruling, the Rajasthan High Court, Jaipur Bench, presided over by Justice Anoop Kumar Dhand, quashed a second charge-sheet issued against Durga Lal Verma, a retired government employee, reiterating the constitutional protection against double jeopardy. The court found the issuance of a second charge-sheet on identical charges, which were previously dropped, to be arbitrary and unjustified.
The case revolved around charges of misappropriation of Rs. 3,822, for which Verma had already faced disciplinary action and was acquitted by the Court of Special Judge, Prevention of Corruption Act, Jaipur, in 2000. The initial proceedings were dropped by the District Collector in 1991 after Verma deposited the questioned amount, and the Tehsildar was directed to close the case.
Despite this closure, a second charge-sheet was issued in 2002, prompting Verma to challenge its validity in the High Court. The court, referencing Article 20(2) of the Constitution of India, which prohibits double jeopardy, held that in the absence of any specific legal provision allowing a second inquiry, such action was impermissible.
Justice Dhand emphasized that once disciplinary proceedings are concluded and charges dropped, there is no legal ground to reinstate them unless specific provisions exist, which was not the case here. The judgment drew upon precedents from the Supreme Court, including decisions in Lt. Governor, Delhi v. HC Narinder Singh and State of Assam v. J. M. Roy Biswas, underscoring the constitutional safeguards against repeated prosecutions on the same facts.
The court further directed the District Collector, Tonk, to release all pending retiral dues to Verma, along with 9% interest per annum, to be paid within three months from the receipt of the order. This decision highlights the judiciary's role in safeguarding employees' rights against arbitrary administrative actions and reiterates the importance of adherence to constitutional principles in disciplinary proceedings.
Bottom Line:
Issuance of a second charge-sheet based on the same set of facts and charges, after earlier charges were dropped and the employee was acquitted, amounts to double jeopardy and is impermissible in law.
Statutory provision(s): Article 20(2) of the Constitution of India, Rajasthan Civil Services (Classification, Control & Appeal) Rules, 1958
