VIGILANCE MANUAL VOLUME III - AP Online

DECISION - 172
427
cross-examine the German supplier being a simple factual one, viz.
whether he had actually paid bribe to him as alleged, did not require
any special legal expertise for that purpose. He had asked for a
railway officer stationed in India as his Defence Assistant and it was
not possible to spare him as the inquiry was being conducted in
London and West Germany. He was given a wide range of choice
and asked to select any officer posted in the London High Commission
and the Missions in other European countries. As such, there was
no violation of natural justice in not making the services of a particular
railway servant available to him. The Supreme Court quoted the
following from the judgment of Lord Denning, Master of the Rolls in
the case of R. vs. Secretary of State for Home Department, (1973)
3 All ER 796: “The rules of natural justice must not be stretched too
far. Only too often the people who have done wrong seek to invoke
‘the rules of natural justice’ so as to avoid the consequences”.
(172)
Evidence — extraneous material
Extraneous material which the Charged Officer had
not opportunity of meeting, cannot be taken into
consideration in proof of the charge.
State of A.P. vs. S.N. Nizamuddin Ali Khan,
AIR 1976 SC 1964 : 1976 (2) SLR SC 532
The Supreme Court observed that on going through the
enquiry proceedings and the report of the Chief Justice (of the Andhra
Pradesh High Court), it found that the enquiring judge had held that
charges relating to the communal bias of the respondent Munsiff
Magistrate and charges relating to unbecoming conduct of the
respondent in relation to engagements of counsel in pending cases,
were proved. The Chief Justice in his report had stated that he was
flooded with complaints from lawyers, litigants and from all sides
which emanated not only from the members of the bar but also from