Nevadya Bhateja and Ronit Rampuriya
Introduction
The Supreme Court in its recent Judgment held that strict rule of evidence is not applicable to a departmental enquiry. The development took place in the case of Kanwar Amninder Singh vs. High Court of Uttrakhand wherein Kanwar Amninder Singh filed for the Special Leave Petition under Article 136 of the Constitution of India. The apex court revoked the decision of Hon’ble High Court of Uttrakhand wherein it stated that all the documents and witnesses should be endorsed by evidence as per the Indian Evidence Act, but the Apex court in its judgment held that during a departmental enquiry, some strict rules related to the evidence could be overlooked.
Facts of the Case
The aggrieved Petitioner who happens to be an ADJ in Uttrakhand was facing a departmental enquiry. The Petitioner filed an application in November 2020 to submit a few documents regarding the enquiry before the enquiry officer but the same was rejected by the presenting officer on the pretext that documents are not admissible under the purview of sections 85A and 85B of the Indian Evidence Act and hence cannot be admitted. Further, in January 2021, another application was filed by the Petitioner wherein he submitted a list of witnesses who are to be produced during the enquiry, but the same was rejected as well.
Aggrieved by the same, the Petitioner filed a writ petition before Hon’ble High Court of Uttrakhand and asserted that the documents submitted are relevant to the enquiry and both the Presenting Officer and the Enquiry Officer are wrong in rejecting the same to be exhibited during the enquiry.
The High Court in its judgment held that no error has been committed on behalf of the officers as enough time has already been given to the petitioner to adduce the evidence on his behalf but nothing was submitted till the date of deadline and the documents submitted by the petitioner after the deadline did not have enough evidence either. Although, the Hon’ble High Court allowed certain evidence and witnesses to be produced during the enquiry but did not permit the case diary that the petitioner received through an RTI.
Aggrieved by the decision of Hon’ble High Court of Uttrakhand, the petitioner filed for a Special Leave Petition in the Supreme Court of India.
Judgment
The division bench of the Supreme Court consisting of L Nageswar Rao J. and BR. Gavaii J. after hearing both the parties overturned the decision of Uttrakhand High Court and held that strict rules related to the filing of evidence can be overlooked during a departmental enquiry and as long as a document or a witness is not prejudiced, it should be admissible to be produced during the enquiry. During its judgment, the Supreme Court opined the following:
“Strict rules of evidence are not applicable to a Departmental Enquiry. There is no prejudice caused to anyone if the case diary is placed on record. The case diary which is shown as exhibit 44 in the application by the petitioner shall be exhibited as a document in the departmental enquiry”.
Therefore, the SC allowed the case diary to be produced during the enquiry as the same was not causing prejudice against anybody. The petitioner hence got the required relief.
Conclusion
Although the decision taken by the Hon’ble Supreme Court is only relevant for the departmental enquiry, it will still make a very big impact in decision making. Thousands of departmental enquiries initiate every year and many people faced the same problem of lack of enough proof related to the document as required by the Indian Evidence Act 1872. The petitioner in the instant case faced the very same problem wherein he wanted to submit a case diary which he received by filing an RTI Application but was rejected by the Enquiry Officer on the pretext of lack of enough evidence. The Supreme Court regarding this matter stated that as long as the document is not prejudiced, it should be accepted and strict rule of evidence is not permissible in departmental enquiries from now on. Hence, solving a major problem faced by people during departmental enquiries.
Leave a Reply