Person Exonerated In Disciplinary Proceedings Can't Be Subjected To 'Double Jeopardy' By Continuing Criminal Action For Same Offence: Delhi HC

The Delhi High Court has said that a person cannot be subjected to double jeopardy by initiating criminal proceeding after he has been exonerated in the disciplinary proceeding on same allegations.

The case pertains to a pilot of Air India who was facing criminal proceeding for forgery even after the disciplinary case against him was closed by the department.

"Continuance of the FIR under the aforesaid circumstances shall, in the opinion of this Court, result in the petitioner undergoing the ordeal twice over again for the same offence. The petitioner cannot be subjected to double jeopardy for the same offence, once after having been given a clean chit on merits in the disciplinary proceedings," said the bench of Justice Saurabh Banerjee.

Captain Arvin Kathpalia filed the plea under Section 482 CrPC seeking quashing of the FIR filed under Sections  201, 204, 465, 466, 471, 506, 202, 217, 279, 280, 120B of IPC and Section 11 of the Aircraft Act, 1934.

As per the FIR, in 2017 the pilot missed the mandatory pre-flight breath analyzer test and allegedly made a false entry in the register.

The senior counsel for the petitioner submitted that Disciplinary Authority of Air India filed a chargesheet in 2019 against the petitioner, alleging acts of forgery and misconduct and the Chairman of Air India vide in 2020 found the "allegations of forgery as unsubstantiated" against the petitioner and therefore closed the disciplinary case initiated against him.

The Court noted that that under similar facts involving similar circumstances, the petitioner was already exonerated by the Chairman of Air India vide order dated 10.02.2020.

Justice Banarjee clarified that there is no bar as to the disciplinary proceedings and the criminal prosecution continuing together at the same time and that the outcome of the disciplinary proceedings will neither have any bearing upon the pendency nor upon the outcome of the criminal prosecution as they can co-exist. However, he added that where the case is one wherein exoneration is on merits as the allegation thereof has been conclusively found unsustainable, based whereon innocence has been proven, then in such a situation, there is no reason to continue the criminal proceeding based on the same facts.

In such cases continuance of the FIR will result in the "petitioner undergoing the ordeal twice over again for the same offence."

The Court concluded that allegations against the petitioner are wholly insufficient to make out a case against him, much less for keeping the FIR alive and it will subject him to "unwarranted injustice."

Consequently, the FIR was quashed and the application was disposed of.

Maninder Singh, Sr. Advocate with  Dinhar Takiar, Simran Chaudhary and Harsh Vashisht and Isha Khanna, Advocates for petitioner.

Mukesh Kumar, APP for the State.

Case Title: Captain Arvind Kathpalia v. GNCTD & Ors.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 812

Click here to read/download the order