Amarjeet Kumar Singh vs Union Of India & Ors
2023 Latest Caselaw 3553 Cal

   17.
18.5.2023

S.D.

W.P.A. 10042 of 2023

Amarjeet Kumar Singh Vs.

Union of India & Ors.

Mr. Krishna Das Poddar ... For the petitiner

Mr. Ajit Kumar Chaubey ..For the U.O.I.

The petitioner has challenged the Memorandum of

Charges dated March 1, 2023.

It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that no

criminal proceedings and departmental proceedings can be

continued parallelly.

It is also submitted that the Memorandum of Charges

contain primarily three charges (a) the petitioner was found

with bottles of liquor when he alighted from the train at

Jamalpur Railway Station on February 11, 2023. Such is an

offence under Section 30(a) Bihar Prohibition and Excise

(Amendment) Act, 2018 (b) the petitioner performed his "A"

shift duty on February 11, 2023 and had to perform his "C"

shift duty on February 12, 2023 as per the roster. The

petitioner left the Headquarters without permission of the

competent authority (c) the Railway quarter that was allotted

in favour of the petitioner for residing with his family was

found to be in occupation of one outsider, Jitendra Kumar

who was found to be residing there with his family members.

The said Jitendra Kumar also submitted that he had no

relationship with the petitioner.

Mr. Das Poddar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of

the petitioner cites a decision reported in (2013) 2 WBLR (SC)

477 (Gurpal Singh vs. High Court of Judicature for

Rajasthan)

Mr. Chaubey, learned counsel appears on behalf of the

Union of India.

Considering the submissions of the parties and the

materials placed on record, this Court finds that no case has

been made out for interim stay of the charge sheet dated

March 1, 2023. The nature of charges in the criminal case and

departmental case are not based on identical set of facts and

evidence. An Apex Court judgment reported in (2019) 7 SCC

797 (Shashi Bhushan Prasad vs. Inspector General, Central

Industrial Security Force & Ors.) is relied on for coming to

the finding that departmental proceedings need not be stayed

during the pendency of the criminal proceedings.

In the circumstances hereinabove, let affidavit-in-

opposition be filed within six weeks from date.

Reply thereto, if any, be filed by two weeks thereof.

Parties will be at liberty to mention the matter for

hearing upon completion of the time stipulated for filing of

affidavits.

All parties shall act on the server copy of this order

duly downloaded from the website of this Court.

(Lapita Banerji, J.)