Retiral Benefits Cannot Be Withheld Due To Pending FIR: Punjab & Haryana High Court Directs State To Release Retiral Benefits Of Retired Police Officer

The Punjab & Haryana High Court directed the State to release retiral dues of a retired police officer which were withheld by it citing pendency of an FIR.

The Court was considering a Petition filed by a retired SPO seeking direction to State to release his retiral dues i.e. gratuity, leave encashment, regular pension, commutation of pension and GIS. 

The single bench of Justice Jagmohan Bansal observed, "....The petitioner virtually retired in July’ 2018. He is unable to get his retiral dues because of aforesaid FIR. He cannot be held guilty for non-adjudication of aforesaid FIR. The fault lies either with the Police Authorities or Public Prosecutor or Court Staff."

The Petitioner was represented by Advocate R.K. Arora while the Respondent was represented by Deputy Advocate General Aman Dhir.

Facts of the Case

The Petitioner joined Punjab Police Force as SPO in 1993 was allotted Constabulary Number in 1994. He was implicated in FIRs under Sections 406, 420, 120-B of Indian Penal Code, 1860 and under Sections 61/1/14 of the Punjab Excise Act, 1914. He was suspended in 2017 on account of circulating some Whatsapp video and a charge-sheet was filed. Accordingly, he was suspended from services in 2018. He preferred an Appeal and was ordered to be compulsorily retire from service.

Counsel for the Petitioner submitted that Petitioner has already been acquitted in the FIR and the police authorities sent his matter for compounding to Excise and Taxation Authorities because offence was compoundable. The State presented challan in 2005 before the Trial Court, however, till date no charge(s) has been framed against him even as a period of more than two decades have passed away. It was contended that there is no adverse order against him in the form of charge-sheet or judgment of sentence.

Reasoning By Court

The Respondent withheld Petitioner’s retiral dues on the sole ground that FIR under Section 61 of Excise Act was pending against him and a period of more than 20 years has elapsed from the date of filing challan in the same.

It further noted that the State was unable to collect record from the Trial Court to support that challan was actually registered and Court proceeded with the matter and even the Excise and Taxation Department has clarified that the matter was never compounded at their end.

It thus held that non-adjudication of an FIR registered against an Employee cannot lead to withholding of retiral benefits.

"In the backdrop, this Court is of the considered opinion that respondent-State has no authority to withhold petitioner’s dues on account of pendency of aforesaid FIR. Accordingly, the respondent-State is hereby directed to release retiral dues of the petitioner," the Court observed.

The Petition was accordingly allowed.

Cause Title: Inderjit Singh vs. State of Punjab and others (2025:PHHC:061931)

Appearances:

Petitioner- Advocate R.K. Arora, Advocate Jugam Arora

Respondent- Deputy Advocate General Aman Dhir

Click here to read/ download Order