One Cannot Be Subjected To Double Jeopardy After Having Been Given A Clean Chit On Merits In Disciplinary Proceedings: Delhi HC
The Delhi High Court has held that a person cannot be subjected to double jeopardy for the same offence after having been given a clean chit on merits in the disciplinary proceedings.
The Court was deciding a case in which the petitioner under Section 482 of CrPC sought quashing of FIR registered under Sections 201/204/465/466/471/506/202/217/279/280/120B of IPC and Section 11 of the Aircraft Act, 1934 and chargesheet under Section(s) 465/466/468/471 of IPC and Section 11 of the Aircraft Act pending before the ACMM, Patiala House Courts, Delhi.
A Single Bench of Justice Saurabh Banerjee said, “… the 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.”
The Bench noted that allegations against the petitioner, are wholly insufficient to make out a case against him, much less for keeping the FIR alive.
Senior Advocate Maninder Singh represented the petitioner while APP Mukesh Kumar represented the respondents.
Factual Background -
As per FIR, the petitioner, a pilot with Air India, was to operate a flight from Delhi to Bangalore before which he missed the mandatory pre-flight breath analyzer test. Upon reaching Bangalore, the petitioner was telephonically informed that he could take the breath analyser test, which he missed in Delhi, in Bangalore as well. The petitioner, without undergoing the Breath Analyser test in Bangalore as well, again operated a flight from Bangalore to Delhi.
Upon reaching Delhi, the petitioner, instead of reporting for the post-flight breath analyser test, went to the Pre-flight Medical Examination Room [PFMER] and made a false entry in the Pre-flight Medical Examination Register for the flight he operated from New Delhi to Bangalore. The complainant made a complaint to the Director General of Civil Aviation [DGCA], who vide order suspended the petitioner’s Air Transport Pilot License [ATPL] for a period of three months. Aggrieved by the order dated wherein the DGCA did not take cognizance of the threat complaint, the Indian Commercial Pilot Association [ICPA], being the complainant therein, preferred a writ petition before the High Court.
The High Court in view of the above facts observed, “… in view of the prevailing facts involved and the legal position discussed hereinabove, in the opinion of this Court, subsistence of the present criminal proceedings emanating from the FIR in question against the petitioner, is likely to result in subjecting him to unwarranted injustice.”
The Court said that although it is trite that the power of quashing an FIR under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is to be used sparingly but in situations where there is hardly any ground leading to the conviction of the petitioner as the same is based on facts which are no more alive, the court is well within its right to proceed with quashing of the FIR.
Accordingly, the High Court disposed of the petition and quashed the FIR.
Cause Title- Captain Arvind Kathpalia v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Anr.
