Ahmedabad: In a significant relief for a government lawyer, the Gujarat High Court has quashed the departmental punishment imposed on him for granting his 'no objection certificate' (NOC) to a bail application filed by a builder. The builder had been arrested following the collapse of a building during the devastating 2001 earthquake.
Background of the Case
The assistant public prosecutor, B G Chaudhary, who was then posted with the metropolitan court in Ahmedabad, faced disciplinary action in the form of stoppage of three increments with future effect. This action stemmed from his endorsement of 'no objection' on a bail application submitted by the builder in a case involving offenses under the Indian Penal Code and the Gujarat Ownership Flats Act.
The complainant, identified as an earthquake victim, had objected to Chaudhary's endorsement and subsequently approached the authorities against the lawyer's gesture. The departmental inquiry found Chaudhary guilty, leading to the punishment.
High Court's Observations
While hearing the matter, the High Court noted that Chaudhary did not dispute making the endorsement. However, the court observed that the disciplinary authority failed to consider his detailed final reply, which explained the circumstances under which the endorsement was made. The High Court emphasized that Chaudhary's submissions were neither recorded nor addressed before he was held guilty.
The court held that such non-consideration violated the principles of natural justice and fairness. It further pointed out that relevant factors were overlooked, including the police filing a closure report against the builder, the complainant later turning hostile, and Chaudhary's unblemished service record.
Direction for Fresh Decision
The High Court stated: 'Since the impugned order was passed in the year 2011, the respondent-disciplinary authority is hereby directed to decide the matter within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The authority must now decide the matter afresh within two months.'
This decision brings relief to the government lawyer and underscores the importance of adhering to principles of natural justice in disciplinary proceedings.
