Madhya Pradesh HC: Damage To Victims Dignity Is Not Sufficient Ground For Not Conducting Departmental Enquiry

Background

• The name of the case was Amit Chaurasia v. The State of M.P. and Another.
• A lady constable had made a complaint against the petitioner for offences punishable under Sections 452, 354, 354G, 376 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code.
• The petitioner was suspended from his service after the complaint.
• The Superintendent of Police dismissed the petitioner from service stating that the entire Police Department had been stigmatized by the conduct of the petitioner.

Contentions of the Parties

• The petitioner contended that he had been removed without enquiry on the basis of a complaint registered against him, which was not justified.
• The Authority clarified that since the case is being tried before a competent court, there was no need of having a departmental enquiry.
• Also, calling the victim to give her statement would cause damage to her reputation and dignity in the department.

Submissions in Bail Application

• Article 311(2)(b) lays down some eventualities when major penalties can be imposed without conducting a departmental enquiry.
• The reason for not conducting a departmental enquiry was unjustified and unreasonable.
• The Court observed that since the victim is a prime witness and she would have to give her statement before the Court, she should not have any problem in giving her statement before the department for enquiry.
• Imposition of major penalties under Article 311(2)(b) is a ground of judicial review if the reasons are insufficient.

Do you think departmental enquiry should be made mandatory? Tell us in the comments section below!