Legal Reference Library

The Supreme Court in State Bank of India & Ors. Vs. Neelam Nag, has held that pendency of a criminal case against an employee cannot be the sole basis to suspend the disciplinary proceedings initiated against him/her for an indefinite period. In the instant case, a complaint for criminal breach of trust was lodged against a bank employee in February 2007. In September 2008, the competent authority initiated departmental inquiry against her. Contending that Clause 4 of the Memorandum of Settlement, which grants protection to bank employees from facing departmental proceedings until the completion of the trial of the criminal case, the delinquent employee approached the High Court against initiation of disciplinary proceedings. A Single Bench order staying disciplinary proceedings until conclusion of criminal trial was later modified by the Division Bench observing that the authority would be free to proceed further in the disciplinary proceedings as soon as the case from the prosecu...

Delhi High Court in Joginder Singh vs. State has observed that keeping a criminal case pending for indefinite period amounts to violation of constitutional rights of the accused recognized under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. Quashing the criminal cases against the accused which were pending since 1998, Justice Suresh Kait said “The petitioner is facing the trial since 1998 although there is no delay on his part. More than 17 years have already been passed”. In 1996, FIR was registered against the petitioner for the offences punishable under Sections 468/471/120B/34 IPC, but charges are not framed till date. The petitioner in this case was arrested on the basis of a disclosure statement made by one Daljeet Singh. Two other accused persons have been declared as proclaimed offenders. Referring to Vakil Prasad Singh v. State of Bihar AIR 2009 SC 1822 , the court said “Nothing material has been brought in the notice of this Court that delay in framing charge is caused by the peti...