In Brief
A CISF constable was acquitted in a criminal case under the Arms Act but dismissed from service following a departmental inquiry for handing over an unlicensed firearm that was used in a murder. He challenged the dismissal, arguing the criminal acquittal should bar disciplinary action. The Supreme Court held that departmental and criminal proceedings are separate with different standards of proof—criminal requires proof beyond reasonable doubt, while disciplinary requires preponderance of probability. Since the charges were based on different facts and evidence, the acquittal did not preclude disciplinary action. The dismissal was upheld as no procedural violation or denial of natural justice occurred.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.