IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No. 1242/2020 Decided on: 22.05.2025 Satya Devi …Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & Ors. .…Respondents. ………………………………………………………………………………. Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioner: Mr. Ashok K. Tyagi, Advocate. For the respondents: Ms. Leena Guleria, Deputy Advocate General. Jyotsna Rewal Dua , J Petitioner is posted as Lady Honorary Head Constable in the respondents-Police Department. FIR No 2/2020 dated 23.01.2020 under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 was registered against her at Police Station State Vigilance and Anti Bureau Nahan, District Sirmour, H.P. The departmental inquiry was also initiated against the petitioner. Memorandum of charges was issued to the petitioner on 13.02.2020 alongwith list of witnesses. Petitioner furnished her reply to the memorandum of charges in February 2020, praying therein that the departmental proceedings be either dropped or kept in abeyance till her statement is recorded in 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 the criminal case under Section 313 of Criminal Procedure Code. Feeling aggrieved against the respondents’ not accepting her prayer, the petitioner instituted this writ petition, seeking following substantive reliefs:- “1. That by issuing appropriate writ or order, the order of departmental inquiry dated 11.02.2020 i.e. annexure P-5 may kindly be quashed and set aside in the interest of justice. 2. That the departmental enquiry initiated against the applicant due to FIR No.2/2020 under Section 7 Prevention of Corruption Act may kindly be stayed either till the conclusion of trial or disclosing of defense under Section 313 Cr.P.C. by the applicant in criminal case.” 2. The main contention urged for the petitioner in the instant case was that since the facts, evidence and witnesses in both the proceedings i.e. criminal case and the departmental inquiry are same and common, therefore, the departmental inquiry be stayed, till disclosing of defence by the petitioner in the criminal trial. Vide order dated 13.03.2020 passed in this writ petition, departmental inquiry was stayed. 3. During hearing of this petition, learned counsel for the petitioner apprised that out of the witnesses cited by the department in the disciplinary proceeding only witness at Serial No.8 i.e. Investigating Officer, remains to be examined in the criminal trial. Learned counsel further submitted that the petitioner, at this stage, does not have any objection for continuation of departmental 3 proceedings, in case, her interest in respect of recording the statement of witness at Serial No.8 in the departmental list of witnesses, is deferred, till the statement of aforesaid witness is recorded in the criminal trial. 4. The above is a fair submission made for the petitioner. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of with following directions:-  Respondents are at liberty to proceed with departmental inquiry against the petitioner. Interim order dated 13.03.2020 is accordingly vacated.  Statement of witness at Serial No.8 (page 44 of the paper book) shall not be recorded in the departmental proceedings till statement of the aforesaid witness is recorded in the Criminal trial. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. Jyotsna Rewal Dua Judge 22nd May, 2025(rohit)