Orissa High Court
Jasmita Bharasagar vs State Of Odisha And Others on 10 October, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.P.(C) No.31034 of 2023
Jasmita Bharasagar .... Petitioner
Ms. A.K. Dei, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha and others .... Opp. Parties
Mr. T. Pattnaik, ASC
CORAM:
JUSTICE A.K. MOHAPATRA
ORDER
Order No. 10.10.2023
03. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual
/Physical Mode).
2. Heard learned counsel for the parties. Perused the writ petition
and documents annexed therewith.
3. Considering the submission made by learned counsel for the
Petitioner that during pendency of criminal trial, filing of defence by
the Petitioner in the disciplinary proceeding will jeopardize the
prospect of the delinquent-Petitioner involved in the criminal case,
this Court finds support for the submission of learned counsel in the
aforesaid context from the decision of the Hon'ble apex Court
reported in AIR 1999 SC 1416, decided taking support of the old
decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court reported in AIR 1965 SC 155.
Similar view has also been taken in a judgment reported in (2012) 1
SCC- 442.
4. By filing the present writ petition, the Petitioner has prayed for
stay of the Departmental Proceeding dated 15.10.2022 under
Annexure-3 series involving the Petitioner till finalization of the
// 2 //
Criminal Trial vide Rourkela Vigilance P.S. Case No.01 dated
12.01.2022 under Section 7 of P.C. (Amendment) Act, 2018 pending
before the S.P. Vigilance, Rourkela, Division.
5. Learned counsel for the State draws the attention of this Court
to the charges framed by Criminal Court and in the Disciplinary
Proceeding and contends that the disciplinary proceeding has been
initiated against Petitioner for suppression of information regarding
his involvement in criminal case and, as such, the charges in both the
cases are different. Therefore, he submits that the ratio decided in
aforesaid Supreme Court judgments are not applicable to the facts of
the present case and the disciplinary proceeding against the
Petitioner should not be stayed awaiting the verdict in criminal case
and further prays for dismissal of the writ petition.
6. This Court on a careful scrutiny of the charges in both
proceedings partly agrees with the submission made by learned ASC
for the state. The charges in criminal case no doubt forms the basis
for the initiation of D.P. in addition to the charge that such
information was not disclosed to the employer by the employee in
violation of the service Rules. However, this Court is also of the
view that while continuing with the D.P. the Petitioner would be
required to disclose his defence which might be detrimental to his
interest involved in the criminal trial.
7. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and upon a
careful analysis of the rival contentions and upon a scrutiny of the
writ petition and the documents attached to it, this Court in the
greater interest of justice deems it proper to dispose of the writ
petition by directing that the Disciplinary Proceeding against the
// 3 //
Petitioner shall remain stayed for a period of one year from the date
of this order. Further, on production of a certified copy of this order
by the Petitioner, the Court in seisin of the trial of the case arising
out of Sambalpur Vigilance P.S. Case No.01 dated 12.01.2022 under
Section 7 of P.C. (Amendment) Act, 2018 shall expedite the trial and
make every endeavour to conclude the trial within one year. Parties
are directed to cooperate with the trial court and in the event, the
charge sheet has been filed.
8. With the aforesaid observation and direction, the writ
application is disposed of.
Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper
application.
( A.K. Mohapatra)
Judge
Anil
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
Signed by: ANIL KUMAR SAHOO
Designation: Junior Stenographer
Reason: Authentication
Location: High Court of Orissa
Date: 13-Oct-2023 18:15:05
