Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2023 DIGILAW 1470 (RAJ)

Praveen Godara v. State of Rajasthan

2023-08-02

DINESH MEHTA

body2023
ORDER : 1. By way of present writ petition, the petitioner has challenged continuation of disciplinary proceedings against him which was initiated by the respondents vide memorandum of charges dated 27.02.2020. 2. The petitioner's main grievance is that an FIR has also been registered against the petitioner being FIR No. 378 dated 15.10.2019 and the charges leveled in the disciplinary proceedings are related to the above referred FIR and that the disciplinary proceedings if allowed to continue will adversely affect the trial pursuant to the said FIR No. 378 dated 15.10.2019. 3. Mr. Solanki, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted most of the charges, out of the five charges, leveled against the petitioner revolve around the FIR No. 378 dated 15.10.2019 and hence, the disciplinary proceedings be ordered to be kept in abeyance until the decision of the case against the petitioner pursuant to above referred FIR. 4. Mr. Manish Vyas, learned Additional Advocate General zealously read the charges and submitted that the charges are entirely different. 5. He also submitted that the petitioner's behaviour has been unbecoming of a Government servant and maybe, an FIR in relation to the same incident has been registered, but since the petitioner's act was with a Constable on duty, such charges need to be dealt with by the Disciplinary Authority. 6. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the charges given along with the memorandum of charges dated 27.02.2020. 7. This Court is of the view that the charges are substantially different. That apart, having regard to the nature of the charges and the fact that strictness of proof in criminal case is entirely different than the strictness of proof in the disciplinary proceedings, the disciplinary proceedings in the present factual matrix deserve to be continued. 8. The writ petition is, therefore, dismissed. 9. It is hereby made clear that this Court has not recorded any finding about petitioner's guilt or otherwise and any observation made will not be construed to be a finding of this Court. 10. The stay application also stands dismissed accordingly.