Whether Pendency of Criminal Appeal Amounts to “Judicial Proceeding” Under 351-AA and 919-A(3) of CSR? Allahabad HC Judgment
While allowing an appeal against the order of the single judge by the Allahabad high court it was held that pendency of criminal appeal against acquittal falls within the domain of term “Judicial Proceedings” the purposes of Regulation 351-AA and 919-A (3) of Civil Services Regulations.
He upon attaining the age of superannuation retired the non-appellant or the petitioner was appointed on the post of constable. An FIR was lodged against him prior to the retirement for the offense under sections 307,332,353, 427 of the Indian penal code and also under section 5 of the explosive act. Apart from the aforesaid under section 302 of the Indian penal code, a complaint was also registered alleging the commission of an offense.
However, in both the case the non-appellant / petitioner was acquitted after the trial. The appeal which was admitted by the high court on 24.10.2013, the state government has preferred an appeal against the order of acquittal.
In reference to the commission of the crime the department did not initiate departmental proceedings’ writ petition which was filed by the non-appellant/petitioner having retired on 31.03.2020 to only seek the full pension and also the other retiral benefits. And that appeal was allowed by the single judge only with the direction to extend the benefit of all retiral benefits within 6 weeks otherwise 12% interest will follow.
Whether pending criminal appeal would fall in the definition of “judicial proceeding” so as to attract Regulations 351-AA and 919-A (3)?
After referring to the provisions of Regulations 351-AA and 919-A(3) a Division Bench of Acting Chief Justice Munishwar Nath Bhandari and Justice Piyush Agarwal had observed that:
Under regulation 351-AA the word “judicial proceeding” would include every proceeding which all are pending in the court like whether it is original or at the appellate stage. So the word judicial proceeding means the proceeding over which judge presides. From the definition of judicial proceeding, a criminal appeal cannot be taken out and thereby if in any case the one is acquitted but the appeal thereupon is pending then he or she would be then governed by the regulation 351-AA and. Therefore, they are entitled to a provisional pension.
In the case of Subhash Chandra Versus S.M. Agarwal reported in 1984 Criminal Law Journal 481, the court referred to the judgement of the supreme court wherein the term “judicial proceeding” was defined to include appellate proceedings also. The contention and parity further rejected by the court because that it would amount to giving direction against the rules.
At last, the court has held that the pending criminal appeal Regulation 351-AA read with Regulation 919-A (3) would be applicable. And at the same time those people who are the non-appellant they would be entitled to the provisional pension. And also, as per the Regulation 919, the earlier which was the provisional pension now is the full pension and also the one would not be entitled to the gratuity till disposal of the appeal.