[ad_1]
27/03/2025
1. Suspension of a government servant alleged to be involved in
criminal offences is legally viewed and meant as a preventive
measure and not punitive. It serves the dual purpose of safeguarding
public interest and preventing undue influence on the course of
prosecution. Similarly, under criminal jurisprudence, pre-trial or as
an under trial detention of a suspect is intended as a preventive
action, not as punishment. We are concerned here with the former.
1.11. While suspension, no doubt, is a crucial tool for maintaining
discipline and transparency in Government services, it should be
exercised with caution, since, in practical terms, suspension is
contemptuously perceived. It shatters public image of a Government
1 Few lines copied inverbatim from another judgment rendered by this very bench, related to
suspension in SBCWP No.1788/2024
[2025:RJ-JD:19943] (2 of 31) [CW-14863/2016]
servant and causes stigma with seriously daunting effects. Even if
the individual is later cleared of wrongdoing, the negative perception
may not fully disappear. Thus, when such suspension is prolonged, it
effectively becomes punitive in nature, especially when the individual
is later acquitted. This results in irreversible civil and reputational
harm, despite a finding of innocence. The reality is stark: regardless
of the legal intent, suspension is widely perceived by society as
indicator of guilt, often causing irreparable damage to an individual’s
public standing and leading to deep personal and professional
demoralization.
[ad_2]
Source link