Bombay HC – Acquittal in bribery case does not guarantee full salary for suspension period – Employer not liable for employee’s bribery prosecution
On 20.11.1986, the petitioner – Medical Officer of MM Corporation – was arrested by the ACB for demand and acceptance of bribe. On 29.11.1986, he was placed under suspension. On acquittal, the suspension was revoked and he was reinstated in service from 10.5.1990.
By the order dated 19.9.2010, the period of 1257 days suspension was treated as leave of various kinds. The balance period of 759 days has been regularized as leave without pay.
Rule 75 of the Mumbai Municipal Corporation Regulations, 1989.
Upon acquittal of a suspended employee, though reinstatement is guaranteed, payment of full salary cannot be an automatic consequence. It depends on facts and circumstances of each case. In cases involving criminal prosecution in respect of private affairs of the employee, who is arrested and was required to be suspended, his acquittal cannot entail financial burden for the employer to pay him full salary and allowances during period of suspension. Also, in cases where the arrest and detention results in suspension in bribery cases, the employer cannot be saddled with the financial burden of paying full salary and allowances since the suspended employee embroils himself in the prosecution. On the other hand, in cases where the prosecution is lodged by the employer, say for offenses of fabrication of official records or for misappropriation of public funds, and the employee is kept under suspension, the acquittal in such case may entitle the employee to receive full salary and allowances since the employer is responsible for his prosecution.
In the present case, Petitioner is repeatedly prosecuted on charges of bribery and corruption. No doubt, he is acquitted in both the prosecutions. However, the Municipal Corporation is not responsible for his suspension. The first suspension during 29 November 1986 to 9 May 1990 was owing to Petitioner’s arrest and prosecution for serious charge of demand and acceptance of illegal gratification. Petitioner has got himself embroiled in the criminal prosecution. The criminal prosecution was not at the behest of the Municipal Corporation. After his acquittal, Petitioner was reinstated in service.
Judgment dated 25.3.2026 of the High Court of Bombay in Writ Petition No.1137 of 2014 of Dr. Lalchand N. Jumani Vs. Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai and others
