The Punjab & Haryana High Court held that merely lodging an FIR against an individual does not constitute “pendency of criminal proceedings” for purposes of withholding promotion under Clause 3(a) of the Army Order. The case concerns a petitioner who had been selected for promotion to the rank of Junior Commissioned Officer (JCO) by an order dated 25 May 2022. However, despite this promotion order, his promotion was not implemented on the ground that an FIR had been registered against him. The authorities treated this FIR as a pending criminal proceeding under Clause 3(a) of the relevant Army Order, and on that basis withheld implementing the promotion.
The petitioner challenged non-implementation of the promotion before the Armed Forces Tribunal (Regional Bench, Chandigarh), but the Tribunal dismissed his claim in December 2023, upholding the view that the pending FIR disentitled him to the benefit of promotion. The petitioner then filed a writ petition before the High Court.
The High Court examined the relevant provisions and precedents, and noted that for the purpose of Clause 3(a), criminal proceedings are “pending” only once a charge-sheet has been filed and cognizance has been taken, or equivalent formal steps (for instance, disciplinary proceedings when a charge memo has been served). The mere registration of an FIR did not satisfy those requirements. The Court relied upon the Supreme Court precedent in Union of India v. K.V. Jankiraman, wherein it was held that an FIR alone does not amount to criminal proceedings being “pending” in the sense required for such consequences.
The Court further observed that the respondents (i.e. the authorities opposing the promotion) themselves admitted in written communication dated 15 January 2024 that no cognizance of the offence had been taken, and no charges had been framed against the petitioner. Thus, there was no material to show that the case had moved beyond mere registration of the complaint to the stage where criminal proceedings could be said to be pending under the Army Order.
On that basis, the High Court found that withholding the petitioner’s promotion on the sole ground that an FIR existed was contrary to law. The order of the Armed Forces Tribunal of 14 December 2023 was held to be perverse, and was set aside. The High Court directed that the petitioner be treated as promoted to the post of JCO in terms of the 25 May 2022 order, with all consequential benefits including salary and service entitlements. The Court directed compliance with its order within eight weeks.
0 Comments
Thank you for your response. It will help us to improve in the future.