Rajasthan High Court orders payment of salary to an employee acquitted from criminal case

The petitioner working as Junior Engineer was placed under suspension, due to a criminal case filed against him. However, no departmental inquiry was initiated. He was later acquitted and was reinstated back to service. His salary was withheld for the period of suspension. He submitted several representations requesting regularization of the suspension period and payment of arrears. In response to which, an order was issued, regularizing the suspension period but denying payment of arrears, except for the subsistence allowance, citing the reason that his acquittal was based on the benefit of a doubt. The Petitioner aggrieved by the same approached the High Court of Rajasthan vide WP (C) 103941/2011seeking to quash the order passed by the respondents. It was observed that once a competent Court has threadbare gone into the evidence adduced by both the sides and found that there was no sufficient material on record which was incriminating enough so as to fasten any criminal culpability on the accused, merely because the accused has been acquitted on the ground that benefit of doubt would not mean that there was otherwise any evidence available. The reliance on “benefit of the doubt” as a reason to deny arrears is unfair, unjust and arbitrary. An acquittal per se signifies the absence of sufficient evidence to establish culpability. Denial of arrears is in direct contradiction with the principle of restoring the petitioner to his rightful position as though the suspension never occurred, save for adjustments like subsistence allowance already paid. A mere “benefit of doubt” acquittal cannot be used as a ruse to deprive an employee of legitimate financial entitlements. The impugned order is set aside and the respondents are directed to pay the dues along with applicable rate of interest as per the service rules.