IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH RSA NO.3166 OF 2009 DECIDED ON : 31.08.2009 Jagmal Singh & others ...Appellants versus State of Haryana & others ...Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI Present : Mr. Suresh Kumar Redhu, Advocate for the appellants. AJAY TEWARI, J. (ORAL) This appeal has been filed against the judgment of the Lower Appellate Court reversing that of the Trial Court dismissing the suit of the appellant for permanent injunction restraining the respondents from continuing with the departmental inquiry on the allegation that the appellant is facing a trial on the same charges in the Criminal Court. The following questions have been proposed: i) Whether the departmental inquiry as well as criminal case can go simultaneously especially when both are based on same grounds? ii)Whether the conducting of departmental inquiry amounts to double jeopardy when the facts are same in the criminal case as well as departmental inquiry? iii)Whether the departmental inquiry will be done in a fair manner especially when the inquiry officer is under the influence of higher authorities of police department, who are bent upon to punish the appellants? RSA No.3166 of 2009 -2- iv)Whether the appellants will be compelled to disclose their defences in advance in the departmental inquiry if the same is permitted to go and the appellant will suffer irreparable loss which cannot be compensated at later stage? It would be seen that all the questions are related. In a latest decision in the case of Balwinder Singh vs. State of Punjab reported as 2009(1) SCT 86 a Division Bench of this Court has specifically held that it is not an inflexible rule that the departmental inquiry and Trial cannot proceed together. Further, it would be seen from the facts of the present case that now the appellants have succeeded in lingering the departmental proceedings for more than five years. A perusal of the judgment of the Lower Appellate Court further reveals that charge was framed against the appellants as far back as 18.10.2004. In these circumstances, applying the above dictum of law the proposed questions have to be held against the appellants. Consequently, this appeal is dismissed. August 31, 2009 (AJAY TEWARI) sonia JUDGE