GHULAM MURTAZA SHEIKH vs The CHIEF MINISTER, SINDH Departmental inquiry and criminal proceedings stemming from

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

GHULAM MURTAZA SHEIKH VS The CHIEF MINISTER, SINDH Departmental inquiry and criminal proceedings stemming from the same offence---Standard of proof---Standard of proof required in a departmental inquiry is not analogous to the standard of proof which is considered necessary in the criminal trial---Departmental inquiry stems from the charges of misconduct where the standard of proof depends on the balance of probabilities or preponderance of evidence but not a proof beyond reasonable doubt, which is a strict proof required in criminal trials. Citation Name: 2024 PLC(CS) 1274 SUPREME-COURTBookmark this Case GHULAM MURTAZA SHEIKH VS The CHIEF MINISTER, SINDH Inquiry proceedings---No opportunity provided to accused official to cross-examine witnesses---Effect---Violation of principles of natural justice and due process of law---Senior Superintendent Prison and Deputy Superintendent Jail ('the petitioners')---Penalty of reduction to lower post for 5 years and dismissal from service respectively---Legality---In the case in hand, admittedly 20 witnesses were examined who deposed against the petitioners but the inquiry officer failed to provide any opportunity to the petitioners to conduct cross-examination of such witnesses to discredit their statement or testimony---Neither the inquiry report depicted that the statements of the alleged 20 witnesses were recorded in presence of petitioners nor any right of cross-examination was provided to them---No evidence which is accusatorial to the opposite party would be admissible unless such party is afforded an evenhanded opportunity of skimming its exactitudes by cross-examination---Right of proper defence and cross-examination of witnesses by the accused is a vested right---In the present case role of inquiry officer was to sift the grain from the chaff and actually establish that the petitioners violated their assigned duties which could only be proved through evidence and if the opportunity of cross-examination was afforded to the petitioners as their defence to disprove the allegations raised against them---Inquiry officer in the present case did not adhere to the principle of natural justice and due process of law, which destroyed the whole substratum of inquiry and the case of misconduct made out by the department against the petitioners---Petitions were converted into appeals and allowed, consequently the penalty of reduction to lower post awarded to Senior Superintendent Prison by the Original and Appellate Authority, and enhanced by the Tribunal from 3 years to 5 years was set aside, and he was restored to his original position with back benefits; whereas the punishment awarded to Deputy Superintendent Jail by the Original and Appellate Authority and conversion of his compulsory retirement into dismissal from service by the Tribunal was also set aside and he was reinstated in service with back benefits. Citation Name: 2024 PLC(CS) 1274 SUPREME-COURTBookmark this Case GHULAM MURTAZA SHEIKH VS The CHIEF MINISTER, SINDH Concurrent departmental inquiry and criminal proceedings stemming from the same offence---Acquittal in criminal proceedings---Effect---Where the accused official is acquitted by the Court in criminal proceedings and his conviction is set aside, it does not mean that he could not be called upon to face disciplinary proceedings on account of misconduct or dereliction of his duties.

GHULAM MURTAZA SHEIKH vs The CHIEF MINISTER, SINDH Departmental inquiry and criminal proceedings stemming from the same offence — 2024 PLC(CS) 1274 SUPREME-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2024 PLC