Tentative Chargesheet Based On Prior Substantive Investigation Is Enough To Halt Promotion: Tripura High Court
|The Tripura High Court held that during the filing of the tentative charge sheet against the appellant, substantive investigation had already taken place, providing sufficient information to the department. Despite not being the final stage of filing the charge sheet, the tentative charge sheet was deemed valid and applicable to the petitioner. The appellant, who held the post of Second-in-Command in Assam Rifles, was facing serious allegations related to undisclosed cash and fixed deposits in his bank accounts, amounting to several lakhs of rupees. The Assam Rifles issued a tentative charge sheet in 2015, alleging the appellant's failure to establish the source of these funds. Subsequently, in 2019, a criminal complaint was filed against the appellant for possessing assets disproportionate to his known sources of income. The case was handed over to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), which filed a charge sheet in March 2021.
A Division Bench Justice T. Amarnath Goud and Justice Arindam Lodh held, “it is clear that in the present case, at the time of filing the tentative charge sheet, substantive investigation was already done. Sufficient information was already there with the department against the petitioner. Though it was not the stage of the final filing of the charge sheet, the tentative charge sheet is to be considered against the petitioner.”
Advocate Somik Deb appeared for the Petitioner and Advocate B. Majumder appeared for the Respondents.
The appellant contended that the sealed cover procedure, as outlined in certain judgments, was not applicable to his case, as he was neither under suspension nor had any charge sheet been issued against him in the criminal case or the departmental proceeding. The appellant argued that his juniors were promoted to the next post of Commandant in 2020, despite the ongoing investigation, and he should have been promoted as well.
The Court, after considering the facts and circumstances, held that the serious allegations against the appellant, involving substantial undisclosed assets, were already present when the tentative charge sheet was issued in 2015 and the criminal complaint was filed in 2019. The Court said, “the department had already taken a decision to proceed against the petitioner for allegation of undisclosed cash and fixed deposits in his bank accounts way back in the year 2015. In the year 2019, the department also lodged a criminal complaint against the petitioner for possessing vast assets in excess of his known sources of income and handed over the investigation to the CBI. Both these events took place before the appellant’s case was ripe for promotion. The juniors of the appellant were promoted in the year 2020. Therefore by that time, the department had already issued a tentative charge sheet under the Assam Rifles Act and lodged a criminal complaint against the petitioner, and handed over the investigation thereof to the CBI.”
Therefore, the Court concluded that the sealed cover procedure was applicable to the appellant, and the judgment of the Single Judge was upheld. The appeal was dismissed, and any existing stay orders were vacated.
Cause Title: Rajdev Singh Yadav v. Union Of India & Ors.
Click here to read/download Judgment