Anil Kumar vs State Of Haryana And Others

Jagmohan Bansal, J

The petitioner through instant petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is seeking direction to respondents to keep departmental proceedings in abeyance till the conclusion of criminal proceedings arising out of FIR No.696 dated 01.11.2021, under Section 25 of Arms Act, 1959 registered at Police Station Shivaji Colony, Rohtak.

Mr. Akshit Pathania, AAG, Haryana submits that all the witnesses stand examined. There were three common witnesses. The Investigating Agency has already filed police report. The matter is at prosecution evidence stage. He further submits that the Coordinate Bench of this Court after noticing judgment of Supreme Court in Capt. M. Paul Anthony vs. Bharat Gold Mines Ltd., 1999(3) SCC 679 has dismissed a bunch of petitions including CWP No.15845 of 2023. The aggrieved officials preferred intra-court appeals including LPA No.1255 of 2024 and 1146 of 2024. The intra court appeals stand dismissed vide judgment dated 22.05.2024 and 08.05.2024.

It is undisputed fact that the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court has dismissed a bunch of petitions involving identical facts and issues. The judgment passed by a Co-ordinate Bench stands upheld by a Division Bench of this Court.

In the wake of judgment dated 22.05.2024 passed by Division Bench of this Court in LPA No.1255 of 2024 titled as “Tulsi Dass vs. State of Haryana and others” and judgment dated 08.05.2024 passed in LPA No.1146 of 2024 titled as “ASI Pawan Kumar vs. State of Haryana and others”, it can be concluded that the respondent cannot travel beyond the police report, thus, no prejudice is going to be caused to petitioner, if he leads his defence in departmental proceedings. There is no substance in the apprehension expressed by the petitioner.

Dismissed.

The petitioner is at liberty to move an appropriate application within three months from today, if cause survives.

Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.