Latest news with #Services(DisciplineandAppeal)Rules
Hans India
a day ago
- Politics
- Hans India
Govt embarrassed as CAT revokes IPS officer's suspension
Bengaluru: In a significant setback to the Karnataka state government, the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) on Tuesday revoked the suspension of IPS officer Vikas Kumar Vikash, who was among the six police officials suspended in connection with the stampede near M. Chinnaswamy Stadium during RCB's IPL victory celebration last month. The stampede, which occurred on June 4, led to the tragic death of 11 individuals and left over 60 injured. Following public outrage and criticism over the failure to manage the crowd, the government had ordered a magistrate-level inquiry and suspended several officials, including then Additional Commissioner of Police (East Division), Vikas Kumar, and then Bengaluru City Police Commissioner B. Dayananda. Challenging his suspension, Vikas Kumar had approached CAT. A bench comprising Justices B.K. Srivatsava and Santosh Mehra had reserved its order on June 24 and delivered its ruling today, directing the state to revoke the suspension and reinstate the officer. The tribunal also ruled that Vikas Kumar is entitled to all service-related benefits. Senior advocate Dhyan Chinappa, representing Vikas Kumar, argued that the suspension violated service rules and lacked procedural backing. With this decision, focus now shifts to similar cases involving other suspended officers, including Dayananda and DCP H.T. Shekhar, which are currently under CAT review and may also see relief soon. The suspensions were executed under All India Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1969 for the IPS officers and Karnataka State Police (Disciplinary Proceedings) Rules, 1965 for the ACP and Police CAT's order exposing legal and procedural lapses in the government's handling of the disciplinary action, the episode has become a source of political embarrassment. It also raises questions about accountability mechanisms and the fairness of immediate punitive measures following high-profile public incidents. However, on Wednesday the government approached the High Court challenging the Central Administrative Tribunal's (CAT) order reinstating Additional Commissioner of Police Vikash Kumar Vikash, who was suspended following the tragic stampede at Chinnaswamy Stadium here last month, which claimed 11 lives and injured 56 others. It contended that the CAT overstepped its jurisdiction by making determinations on the incident without the benefit of a full-fledged departmental inquiry. It termed the Tribunal's reasoning as 'perverse' and inconsistent with established legal principles concerning suspension.
NDTV
16-06-2025
- Politics
- NDTV
In Supreme Court Today, 'Missing Cash, Forced Retirement', Nagaland Judge
New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Monday granted anticipatory bail to a retired Nagaland district judge who alleged "malicious prosecution" over complaints of misappropriation of cash - i.e., cash sureties deposited by bail recipients - when he was Principle and District Judge for Mon district. A police case was filed against Inalo Zhimomi and two others based on a complaint by the current Principle and District Judge on May 26. He had been released from service by the state after a March 27 Nagaland High Court order that he had challenged in the Gauhati High Court. Zhimomi moved the top court against an interim order Gauhati High Court, passed on May 29, declining to grant temporary release to the petitioner without going into the merits of the case. The Principal District and Judge for Dimapur district had given a written statement, on the directions of the Gauhati High Court, that a sum of Rs 14.35 lakh was found to be missing. This was cash deposited for sureties in connection with pending criminal cases. Unlike other states, Nagaland does not have a bail bond system. Instead, cash must be deposited for payment of sureties listed in bail orders. The missing cash includes bail amounts are from 29 cases heard last year, the police was told. Zhimomi has now moved Supreme Court claiming that when he was Chief Judicial Magistrate in Kohima, he made wrote to the Gauhati High Court in September 2013 to flag this very issue. In his plea to the top court, the retired judge called his enforced retirement "illegal" and alleged violations of the Constitution, including the registration of a criminal case without following the convention established by the Supreme Court in a 1991 case. That verdict had mandated prior consultation with the Chief Justice before initiating criminal proceedings against judicial officers from that state. He further alleged that post-retirement disciplinary proceedings contradicted the state's Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules. Zhimomi told the top court the alleged amount of missing cash was a symptom of "systemic issues in Nagaland's subordinate judiciary", where bail amounts are not deposited correctly. He gave the example of neighbouring Assam and said the charges against him represented "a clear pattern of malicious prosecution evidenced by the sequence of suspension, compulsory retirement, post-retirement disciplinary proceedings, and, finally, a criminal case against a judicial officer who had earlier flagged concerns about the cash surety system". That the High Court did not examine flagged issues with the deposit of bail money, i.e., the amount is not deposited with the Treasury of the concerned district, "clearly demonstrates the issue (on the administrative side) has not been properly looked into by the High Court", he said. At the end of the hearing, the Supreme Court granted Zhimomi some relief. However, the case will continue to be heard by the High Court. Zhimomi was represented by Advocate on Record Aditya Giri and Senior Counsel S Borgoahain.
