RANCHI, India, Dec. 31 -- Jharkhand High Court issued the following order on Dec. 1:

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents.

2. Petitioner, by way of filing this writ petition, has prayed for quashing the order contained in Memo No. 414 dated 16.09.2025 (Annexure 4), whereby the petitioner, who was working on the post of Clerk at Primary Teachers Education College, Gama, District Godda, has been put under suspension, for the alleged misconduct of turning hostile while deposing on behalf of the Prosecution as a Prosecution Witness in a criminal case arising out of G.R. No.693 of 2014. The petitioner has also prayed for consequential reliefs.

3. Petitioner was a witness in a criminal case being G.R. No.693 of 2014. Petitioner had deposed as P.W.1 in the said case and backtracked from his earlier statement, thus, he was declared hostile. As the petitioner backtracked from his earlier, statement and did not support the prosecution case, information was given to the Deputy Commissioner, Godda by the Assistant Public Prosecution, whereafter, the petitioner was put under suspension on 16.09.2025. This suspension order is under challenge in this writ petition.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner was never been associated with the office of the then District Superintendent of Education, Godda, nor was he entrusted with any work pertaining to the aforesaid criminal case, neither any record pertaining to or which lead to institution of the said criminal case, has remotely been associated with this petitioner. He further contended that the police had not at all put any question in course of investigation to the petitioner, with respect to the alleged incident.

5. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that the petitioner, who was the prosecution witness in G.R. No. 693 of 2014 turned hostile while deposing as P.W.1. He back tracked from his earlier statement given before the police during investigation. The Regional Joint Director of Education issued a show cause notice to the petitioner and subsequently, the petitioner has been put under suspension vide office order contained in memo No.414 dated 16.09.2025. He contended that the petitioner being a government servant, ought to have been sensitive while deposing as a prosecution witness in Court and taking cognizance of him being turning hostile he has rightly been put under suspension after following the settled procedure.

6. After hearing the parties, I have gone through the records of the case. I find no illegality in the order passed by the respondents putting the petitioner under suspension. A witness turning hostile itself is a serious issue and that too when the witness is a Government Servant and the criminal case is in relation to the department. This conduct has to be dealt with sternly and seriously. The department has taken serious and correct stand against the petitioner. In fact, the Trial Court also can take appropriate steps against the hostile witness in accordance with aw.

7. Since the employer is taking steps against the employee who became a hostile witness and who is none but a government servant, I am not inclined to interfere with the impugned order passed by the respondents putting the petitioner under suspension.

8. This writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of.

9. Pending interlocutory applications, if any, stand disposed of.

Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.