Title: RAM LAL V STATE OF RAJASTHAN
Citation: CIVIL APPEAL NO. 7935 OF 2023
Dated on: 4.12.2023
Corum: HON’BLE JUSTICE JK MAHESWARI & JUSTICE K.V VISWANATHAN
Facts of the case
In the present case Ram Lal, the appellant, worked as a constable and faced dismissal. His dismissal was based on an alleged change of his birth date. Specifically, he was suspected of changing his birthday from 21.04.1974 to 21.04.1972 on his 8th grade marksheet. This change was supposedly made to qualify for recruitment. It is also to be noted that Ram Lal had previously been convicted of cheating in a trial court. He was eventually acquitted by an appellate court. Five witnesses were examined during the departmental hearing, and the Enquiry Officer determined that the charges were proven. The same claim was made in both the departmental and criminal cases. The appellant was acquitted in the criminal trial when the prosecution failed to establish the charge. The original 8th grade marksheet, the date of birth, and the prosecution evidence were critical in both the criminal trial and the departmental investigation.
Issues raised
(a) whether the dismissal order was justified based on the departmental enquiry?
(b) what was the effect of the acquittal order on the dismissal order?
Legal provision
In the present case the appellant was charged with:
Section 420: Cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property.
Section 467: Forgery of valuable security, will, etc
Section 468: Forgery for purpose of cheating
Section 471: Using as genuine a forged document or electronic record
The appellant in the instant case was charged with the above sections for allegedly providing documents that had false records of his Date of birth. It was alleged that this was done to project himself as having attained majority at the time of the recruitment.
Court analysis and Judgement
The Supreme Court approved the appeal and overturned the dismissal order. It ruled that the departmental investigation was tainted by omitting significant and material information, such as the original 8th standard marksheet and the investigating officer’s statement, which demonstrated that there was no change in the date of birth. It further determined that the acquittal ruling was based on a thorough examination of the prosecution’s evidence and that the charge was not only not proven, but also disproven. It further found that permitting the dismissal order to remain would be unreasonable, unfair, and oppressive, because the charges were similar, and the evidence, witnesses, and circumstances were the same in both proceedings. The Court also ordered the appellant’s restoration with all attendant advantages, including seniority, notional promotions, wage adjustment, and other benefits3. It also granted the appellant 50% of the back wages.
“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”
Written by- Namitha Ramesh
