Chhattisgarh HC allows departmental action against railway officer despite pending bribery trial, citing delay and lack of complexity

News Citation : 2026 LN (HC) 273 | 2026:CGHC:17968-DB

April 21, 2026 : The High Court of Chhattisgarh has dismissed a writ petition filed by a railway employee seeking a stay on departmental proceedings initiated against him while a parallel criminal case is pending. The Division Bench comprising Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal and Justice Sachin Singh Rajput upheld the earlier order of the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT), finding no legal error in allowing both proceedings to continue simultaneously.

The case arose from a corruption allegation against Anup Kumar Awale, a Chief Staff and Welfare Inspector with the South East Central Railway (SECR), Nagpur Division. According to the record, Awale was caught red-handed by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) in August 2021 while allegedly accepting a bribe of ₹2 lakh from a widow in connection with facilitating compassionate employment for her son and processing settlement dues. A criminal case under the Prevention of Corruption Act was registered, followed by departmental disciplinary proceedings initiated in March 2022.

Awale approached the CAT seeking a stay on the departmental inquiry, arguing that both proceedings were based on identical facts and shared witnesses. He contended that continuing the departmental inquiry would prejudice his defense in the criminal trial by forcing premature disclosure of his case strategy. However, the CAT rejected his plea, prompting him to file the present writ petition before the High Court.

Before the High Court, the petitioner relied on established Supreme Court precedents, particularly Capt. M. Paul Anthony v. Bharat Gold Mines Ltd., to argue that departmental proceedings should be stayed where facts and evidence overlap significantly with a criminal case. He also cited concerns about his right to a fair trial under Article 21 of the Constitution.

On the other hand, the Union of India opposed the plea, highlighting that the criminal trial had seen little progress since the charge sheet was filed in December 2021. The respondents argued that staying the departmental proceedings indefinitely would delay administrative action and accountability.

The High Court examined the legal position on simultaneous criminal and departmental proceedings and reiterated that there is no absolute bar on conducting both in parallel. It noted that while a stay may be justified in cases involving complex questions of fact and law, such a determination depends on the specific circumstances of each case.

In this instance, the Court found that the petitioner failed to demonstrate the presence of complicated legal or factual issues warranting a stay. It also emphasized the significant delay in the criminal trial, observing that proceedings had not meaningfully progressed for nearly five years. Given these factors, the Court held that continuing the departmental inquiry was appropriate and consistent with Supreme Court guidelines.

The Bench further underscored the seriousness of the allegations, noting that the petitioner was allegedly caught accepting a bribe from a widow seeking employment assistance for her son. In such circumstances, the Court found no justification to halt disciplinary action.

Concluding that the CAT’s decision was legally sound and free from jurisdictional error, the High Court dismissed the writ petition, allowing both proceedings to continue independently.

Case Reference : WPS No. 3190 of 2025 (Anup Kumar Awale vs Union of India and Others); Counsels: For Petitioner – Mr. Animesh Tiwari, Advocate; For Respondents – Mr. Ramakant Mishra, Deputy Solicitor General of India.