The Patna Bench of the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) has refused to quash disciplinary proceedings against Bihar cadre Indian Police Service (IPS) officer Aditya Kumar, who is accused of involvement in a conspiracy to impersonate a former Chief Justice of the Patna High Court to influence senior police officials [Aditya Kumar v. UOI].
A Bench of Judicial Member Justice Narendra Kumar Johari and Administrative Member Kumar Rajesh Chandra held that the pendency of criminal proceedings in the matter did not prevent the government from independently examining allegations of misconduct in disciplinary proceedings.
The tribunal also rejected Kumar's allegation that disciplinary proceedings were malicious since they were initiated shortly after orders extending his suspension were held void for certain procedural lapses.
"Chronology or proximity in time (between the initiation of disciplinary proceedings and the order declaring the suspension extension orders void), by itself, does not establish mala fide," the CAT held.
The case arose from an FIR registered by Bihar's Economic Offences Unit in October 2022.
According to the State government, an individual allegedly impersonated the then Chief Justice of the Patna High Court and contacted the Director General of Police and other senior officials through telephone and WhatsApp calls to secure favourable administrative decisions concerning a senior officer.
Kumar was named as an accused and suspended on October 18, 2022. He surrendered before a criminal court in December 2023 and secured bail in April 2024.
In March 2025, the CAT declared the extension of his suspension beyond October 17, 2023, invalid because the government had failed to follow the prescribed statutory procedure.
Five days after that ruling, the government issued a charge memorandum initiating disciplinary proceedings against him.
Kumar challenged the memorandum, arguing that it had been issued after an unexplained delay of over two years to harass him and deny him promotion to the rank of Deputy Inspector General of Police.
However, the tribunal found that the government had begun considering disciplinary action in December 2022, well before Kumar obtained any relief against the extension of his suspension.
"The delay in completing the process may legitimately call for explanation; nevertheless, on the material presently available, it cannot by itself establish that the charge memorandum was conceived as a retaliatory measure after the applicant approached this Tribunal," the CAT held.
The tribunal further held that the existence of a criminal case did not automatically invalidate departmental proceedings for misconduct.
"A criminal prosecution and a departmental proceeding operate in different fields and are governed by different standards of scrutiny that is proof beyond all reasonable doubt vs. preponderance of probability," it reiterated.
It also noted that one departmental charge concerned Kumar's alleged unauthorised absence from his designated headquarters during suspension.
While permitting the inquiry to continue, the tribunal also expressed concern over the prolonged nature of the proceedings against Kumar and directed the government to endeavour to conclude them within six months.
It clarified that it had expressed no opinion on the merits of the allegations ahainst him.
Advocate MP Dixit represented Kumar.
Advocates TN Thakur, Sarvdeo Singh, AK Sharma and Sanjay Kumar appeared for the respondent authorities.
[Read Judgment]