THE DEPUTY INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE & ANR. versus S. SAMUTHIRAM

Citation: [2012] 11 S.C.R. 174 · Decided: 30-11-2012 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Cited by 6 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
B 
c 
[2012] 11 S.C.R. 174 
THE DEPUTY INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE & 
ANR. 
v. 
S. SAMUTHIRAM 
(Civil Appeal No. 8513 of 2012) 
NOVEMBER 30, 2012 
[K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN AND DIPAK MISRA, JJ.] 
Service Law: 
Dismissal - Member of Armed Reserved - Prosecution 
of, for offences punishable uls 4 of Tamil Nadu Prohibition of 
Eve-Teasing Act and s. 509 /PC - In departmental inquiry 
a/legations found proved and punishment of dismissal 
0 imposed - Subsequently, acquittal in criminal case - Held: 
Mere acquittal of an employee by a criminal court has no 
impact on the disciplinary proceedings - In the absence of 
any provision in the service rule for reinstatement, if an 
employee is honourably acquitted by a criminal court, no right 
E is conferred on the employee to claim any benefit including 
reinstatement -
In the instant case, in departmental 
proceedings the charges were proved - In the criminal case 
the complainants turned hostile and other key witnesses 
including the doctor were not examined by the prosecution -
In the circumstances, the court held that there was no 
F evidence to implicate the accused - That being the factual 
situation, the delinquent cannot be said to have been 
honourably acquitted by criminal court - Even otherwise, he 
is not entitled to claim reinstatement since the Tamil Nadu 
Service Rules do not provide so - High Court, in its limited 
G jurisdiction under Art. 226 of the Constitution, was not justified 
in setting aside the punishment imposed in the departmental 
proceedings - Judgment of High Court is set aside - Tamil 
Nadu Prohibition of Eve-Teasing Act, 1998 -
s.4 -
Constitution of India, 1950 - Art. 226. 
H 
174 
DEPUTY INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE v. S. 
175 
SAMUTHIRAM 
Sexual Harassment: 
A 
Eve-teasing - Held: Eve-teasing is a euphemism, a 
conduct which attracts penal action - The consequence of 
eve-teasing may at times be disastrous - There is no uniform 
law to curb eve-teasing effectively - Only in the State of Tamil 
8 
Nadu, a Statute has been enacted, and that too has no teeth 
- The necessity of a proper legislation to curb eve-teasing is 
of extreme importance - Until suitable legislation to curb eve-
teasing takes place, directions are issued to take urgent 
measures so that the evil can be curtailed to some extent -
Constitution oflndia, 1950-Arts. 21, 14 and 15- Legislation. 
C 
WORDS AND PHRASES: 
Expression, 'honourable acquittal' - Explained. 
The respondent, while posted with the Armed D 
Reserve and deputed for duty at a Police out post, was 
by an order dated 18.7.1999 placed under suspension 
w.e.f. 10.7.1999. The allegations against him were that on 
9. 7 .1999, at 11 :00 pm he went to the bus stand in a 
drunken state and misbehaved with and eve-teased a E 
married woman. He was also found absent from duties. 
A complaint against the respondent was registered at the 
Police Station for offences punishable u/s 4 of the Tamil 
Nadu Prohibition of Eve-Teasing Act, 1998 and s.509 IPC. 
The departmental proceedings culminated in dismissal of F 
the respondent from service. During the pendency of the 
O.A. filed by the respondent before the Tamil Nadu 
Administrative Tribunal, he was acquitted in the criminal 
case. The Tribunal held that no reliance could be placed 
on the judgment of the criminal court, and dismissed the G 
O.A. However, the High Court allowed the writ petition of 
the respondent. 
In the instant appeal filed by the Department, the 
question for consideration before the Court was: when 
H 
176 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2012) 11 S.C.R. 
A the departmental enquiry has been concluded resulting 
in the dismissal of the delinquent from service, will the 
subsequent finding recorded by the criminal court 
acquitting the respondent delinquent, have any effect on 
B 
the departmental proceedings? 
Allowing the appeal, the Court 
HELD: 1.1. Mere acquittal of an employee by a 
criminal court has no impact on the disciplinary 
proceedings initiated by the Department. The charges in 
C the departmental proceedings were inquired into by the 
Deputy Superintendent of Police. The Department 
examined ten witnesses; and fourteen documents were 
produced. On the side of the defence, D.W. 1 and D.W. 2 
were examined. The Enquiry Officer found all tlJe three 
D charges proved beyond reasonable doubt. P.Ws. 4 and 
5, the two Head Constables who had taken the 
respondent and the complainants to the Police; Station, 
and PW 6, the Head Constable of the Police:Stati

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.