- (1.) The decision of this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India turns on the construction which is to be placed on the language of Rule 16.3 of the Punjab Police Rules . Amin Lal petitioner who holds that substantive rank of Sub-Inspector in the Punjab Police Force, was prosecuted under Sections 479/411 of the Indian Penal Code and was acquitted by Magistrate 1st Class on 23rd of November, 1961. After the order of acquittal was passed, the Deputy Inspector-General of Police, P.A.P. Jullundur Cantonment, directed an enquiry against him departmentally, the allegations being substantially the same as in the criminal case. The summary of misconduct was served on the petitioner by the Enquiry Officer Shri Jaswant Singh, Deputy Superintendent of Police, on 11th September, 1962. It is contended on behalf of the petitioner that the provisions of Rule 16.3 provide a bar to the present departmental enquiry and this Court is invited to quash the order for its initiation in certiorari proceedings.
(2.) Under clause (1) of rule 16.3 of the Punjab Police Rules :- "When a Police Officer has been tried and acquitted by a criminal Court he shall not be punished departmentally on the same charge or on a different charge upon the evidence cited in the criminal case, whether actually led or not, unless - (a) * * * * * (b) * * * * * (c) the Court has held in its judgment that an offence was actually committed and that suspicion rests upon the police officer concerned; or "(d) the evidence cited in the criminal case discloses facts unconnected with the charge before the Court which justify departmental proceedings on a different charge; or (e) * * * * *
(3.) While conceding the force of clause (1) of Rule 16.3, it is sought by the learned Assistant Advocate-General, appearing on behalf of the State to bring the present enquiry within exceptions (c) and (d).;