Tag Archives: inquiry

Trial and Inquiry

‘Trial’ means determination of issues adjudging the guilt or the innocence of a person, the person has to be aware of what is the case against him and it is only at the stage of framing of the charges that the court informs him of the same, the ‘trial’ commences only on charges being framed.
Section 2(g) of the Cr.P.C. therefore clearly envisages inquiry before the actual commencement of the trial, and is an act conducted under Cr.P.C. by the Magistrate or the Court. The word ‘inquiry’ is, therefore, not any inquiry relating to investigation of the case by the investigating agency but is an inquiry after the case is brought to the notice of the court on the filing of the charge-sheet. The Court can thereafter proceed to make inquiries and it is for this reason that an inquiry has been given to mean something other than the actual trial.
Even the word “course” occurring in Section 319 Cr.P.C., clearly indicates that the power can be exercised only during the period when the inquiry has been commenced and is going on. It covers the entire wide range of the process of the pre-trial and the trial stage. The word “course” therefore, allows the Court to invoke this power to proceed against any person from the initial stage of the inquiry upto the stage of the conclusion of the trial. The Court does not become functus officio even if cognizance is taken so far as it is looking into the material qua any other person who is not an accused. The word “course” ordinarily conveys a meaning of a continuous progress from one point to the next in time and conveys the idea of a period of time, duration and not a fixed point of time. Hardeep Singh v. State of Punjab, 2014 (85) ACC 313.


Leave a comment

Filed under Criminal Law, Trial and Inquiry

Charge-sheet cannot generally be a subject-matter of challenge

Charge-sheet cannot generally be a subject – matter of challenge as it does not adversely affect the rights of the delinquent unless it is established that the same has been issued by an authority not competent to initiate the disciplinary proceedings. Neither the disciplinary proceedings nor the charge – sheet be quashed at an initial stage as it would be a pre-mature stage to deal with the issues. Proceedings are not liable to be quashed on the grounds that proceedings had been initiated at a belated stage or could not be concluded in a reasonable period unless the delay creates prejudice to the delinquent employee. Gravity of alleged misconduct is a relevant factor to be taken into consideration while quashing the proceedings. (Secretary, Ministry of Defence v. Prabhash Chandra Mirdha).

Leave a comment

Filed under Departmental Proceedings, Employment Law

Dismissal from service – Reasonable Opportunity

In a recent judgment of the Allahabad High Court in Ram Badan Chauhan v. Regional Administrative Committee, the term “Reasonable opportunity” in dismissing an employee from service was explained as under:

‘Reasonable opportunity would mean an opportunity which is to be given to the delinquent official to explain his conduct regarding the allegations leveled against him and also includes the manner in which the proceedings have been conducted. In this behalf, he is required to be provided both the inquiry report, copy of the proceedings in order to question the said inquiry. Appointing authority is required to examine the explanation of the delinquent official both on the manner in which inquiry has been conducted as also in respect to the punishment proposed by him. The proposed opinion framed by the appointing authority on the basis of an inquiry report is required to be reassessed and reviewed after the explanation is submitted by the delinquent official. This in essence is the requirement of rule as also based upon principle of providing reasonable opportunity to the delinquent official. “

Leave a comment

Filed under Dismissal of an employee, Employment Law