SC rules departmental action collapses after acquittal in criminal case

ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court (SC) has ruled that departmental proceedings against a civil servant, based solely on his involvement in a criminal case, cannot continue once the individual is acquitted — unless the departmental charge is independently probe-able.

A two-member bench comprising Justice Mansoor Ali Shah and Justice Aqeel Ahmed Abbassi reinstated police constable Ghulam Murtaza to service after allowing his appeal against the Punjab Service Tribunal Lahore, which had upheld his dismissal.

Setting aside both the tribunal’s judgment and the dismissal order, the apex court observed that the charge of “involvement in a criminal case” is inherently incapable of departmental proof, as it falls within the exclusive jurisdiction of criminal courts.

Justice Mansoor Ali Shah, authoring the five-page judgment, wrote that once a civil servant is acquitted of the same accusation by a criminal court, the departmental authority has no ground to proceed further. Any continuation of such action, the court said, would violate fairness and legality, and infringe constitutional guarantees under Article 10A (right to fair trial), Article 14 (right to dignity), and Article 9 (right to life and livelihood).

The judgment stressed that disciplinary proceedings must rest on independent and probe-able evidence of misconduct to remain valid even after acquittal. Conversely, if departmental action is based solely on an FIR or criminal case, the employee’s acquittal nullifies the very foundation of the proceedings, rendering any penalty legally untenable and constitutionally infirm.

The court also noted that although the Additional Advocate General argued that the petitioner’s appeal was time-barred, this issue was never raised before the tribunal. Given the circumstances, the Supreme Court declined to take up that objection and ordered Ghulam Murtaza’s reinstatement into service.

The court observed that the inquiry report remained silent on the allegation of failure to perform duty. Relying solely on the report, the competent authority once again dismissed the petitioner on June 16, 2022. His departmental appeal and revision were subsequently dismissed on April 6, 2023, and August 21, 2023, respectively. The Punjab Service Tribunal also rejected his appeal on May 16, 2024, prompting the current Civil Petition for Leave to Appeal before the Supreme Court.

The apex court held that the order of acquittal demonstrated that the petitioner had been acquitted on merits after being extended the benefit of doubt.

Justice Mansoor Ali Shah, in the judgment, reaffirmed that departmental disciplinary proceedings and criminal proceedings, though sometimes arising from the same facts, operate in distinct legal domains and are governed by different standards of proof.

The court clarified that disciplinary inquiries proceed on the preponderance of probability, aimed at ensuring efficiency and integrity in public service, whereas criminal trials require proof beyond reasonable doubt, to establish penal liability.

“Consequently, the pendency or outcome of one does not automatically affect the other, and both may lawfully proceed concurrently,” the judgment concluded.