<p>The Supreme Court on Tuesday said acquittal in a criminal case does not debar the employer from taking disciplinary action against an erring employee as the principles which govern such an enquiry are distinct from those that apply to a trial. </p>.<p>In a criminal trial, the burden lies on the prosecution to establish the case beyond reasonable doubt. The accused is entitled to a presumption of innocence. The purpose of a disciplinary proceeding is to enquire into an allegation of misconduct by an employee which results in a violation of the service rules, a bench of Justices D Y Chandrachud and Surya Kant said.</p>.<p>"Unlike a criminal prosecution where the charge has to be established beyond reasonable doubt, in a disciplinary proceeding, a charge of misconduct has to be established on a preponderance of probabilities. The rules of evidence which apply to a criminal trial are distinct from those which govern a disciplinary enquiry," the bench added.</p>.<p>The top court allowed an appeal by the Karnataka government against a judgement by High Court's Kalaburagi bench of November 29, 2017. The High Court had then set aside a decision for compulsory retirement of Umesh, a village accountant in Bijapur district, on a charge of bribery. It had then noted that the accused had been acquitted in the criminal case.</p>.<p>After hearing Karnataka government counsel V N Raghupathy, the top court's bench said the High Court here trenched upon a domain which falls within the disciplinary jurisdiction of the employer.</p>.<p>The enquiry was conducted in accordance with the principles of natural justice. The findings of the inquiry officer and the disciplinary authority are sustainable with reference to the evidence. The acquittal in the criminal trial did not impinge upon the finding of misconduct in the disciplinary proceeding, the bench added.</p>.<p>In its judgement, the bench also emphasised, in the exercise of judicial review, the court does not act as an appellate forum over the findings of the disciplinary authority and does not re-appreciate the evidence with regard to finding of misconduct arrived at in the course of a disciplinary enquiry.</p>.<p><strong>Check out the latest videos from <i data-stringify-type="italic">DH</i>:</strong></p>
<p>The Supreme Court on Tuesday said acquittal in a criminal case does not debar the employer from taking disciplinary action against an erring employee as the principles which govern such an enquiry are distinct from those that apply to a trial. </p>.<p>In a criminal trial, the burden lies on the prosecution to establish the case beyond reasonable doubt. The accused is entitled to a presumption of innocence. The purpose of a disciplinary proceeding is to enquire into an allegation of misconduct by an employee which results in a violation of the service rules, a bench of Justices D Y Chandrachud and Surya Kant said.</p>.<p>"Unlike a criminal prosecution where the charge has to be established beyond reasonable doubt, in a disciplinary proceeding, a charge of misconduct has to be established on a preponderance of probabilities. The rules of evidence which apply to a criminal trial are distinct from those which govern a disciplinary enquiry," the bench added.</p>.<p>The top court allowed an appeal by the Karnataka government against a judgement by High Court's Kalaburagi bench of November 29, 2017. The High Court had then set aside a decision for compulsory retirement of Umesh, a village accountant in Bijapur district, on a charge of bribery. It had then noted that the accused had been acquitted in the criminal case.</p>.<p>After hearing Karnataka government counsel V N Raghupathy, the top court's bench said the High Court here trenched upon a domain which falls within the disciplinary jurisdiction of the employer.</p>.<p>The enquiry was conducted in accordance with the principles of natural justice. The findings of the inquiry officer and the disciplinary authority are sustainable with reference to the evidence. The acquittal in the criminal trial did not impinge upon the finding of misconduct in the disciplinary proceeding, the bench added.</p>.<p>In its judgement, the bench also emphasised, in the exercise of judicial review, the court does not act as an appellate forum over the findings of the disciplinary authority and does not re-appreciate the evidence with regard to finding of misconduct arrived at in the course of a disciplinary enquiry.</p>.<p><strong>Check out the latest videos from <i data-stringify-type="italic">DH</i>:</strong></p>
