VIGILANCE MANUAL VOLUME III

900 DECISION - 498
the case and doing investigation, and, therefore, only the Special
Judge has power to pass attachment of the property even at the
stage of investigation as is done in this case. The High Court held
that the interpretation given by the Special Judge with regard to the
harmonious construction is correct and that there is no ground to
interfere with the impugned order.
(498)
(A) Witnesses — examination of
Not necessary to examine all cited witnesses.
(B) Charge sheet — format of
Failure to follow format not of consequence if all
particulars are given.
Ashok Kumar Monga vs. UCO Bank,
2000(2) SLJ DEL 337
The appellant contended that the Bank examined only 5 of the
19 witnesses cited in the list of witnesses and that this has prejudiced
his defence. The High Court held that it is not mandatory to examine all
cited witnesses if the disciplinary authority feels that charges are proved
by 5 of them and that the Bank has right to drop the remaining witnesses.
If the appellant thought that some of the witnesses not examined by the
Bank are relevant, he could always summon them as his witnesses.
A show cause notice was issued which was treated as a
charge sheet. The appellant challenged it on the ground that it was
not in the proper format. The High Court held that what matters is
the substance and not the format of charge sheet and that the show
cause notice contained all details.
(499)
(A) P.C. Act, 1988 — Sec.13 (1)(e), Explanation
(B) Disproportionate assets — income from known