This appeal has been filed before the Supreme Court pursuing the order passed by the Division Bench of the High Court of Gujarat on 10^th April 2018.  The Division Bench of High Court allowed the appeal arising from the decision of the learned Single Judge wherein the respondent was allowed to file the appeal and reply to the notice sent by the appellant as the show cause notice under the regulation specified therein with regards to the Life Insurance Corporation of India under the section 39(4). The letters of patent arise from the order of the single learned bench of the High Court wherein the respondent has filed a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The respondent herein filed the appeal against the said conviction by the court under the Prevention of Corruption Act and the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

The appellant submitted the facts upon which the court put reliance wherein it states that the respondent applied for a job with the appellant wherein the respondent was hired and appointed as the probationary officer under the hire contract, whereas the office was confirmed by the appellant on the 4^th December 1996. The appellant filed a charge sheet with the police on the 16^th February 1996. The charge sheet that was filed included the offences such as the respondent issued and confirms the policy issuance of the sum assured that amounted to INR 10,00,000/-  and the respondent also has been charged the offence of the perjury where the respondent issued and confirmed the school leaving certificate which was issued by the City High School, Raipur, Ahmadabad for the purpose of confirming of the age so as to pass the policy from the age barrier set forth by law whereas the leaving certificate after the confirmation turned out to be fake which showed the as true report.

The respondent also submitted the hazard report without confirming the report or making any inquiries with respect to the geniuses of the report and also submitted the proceeding with regards to any procedure regulating the passing of the documents in the policy issuance matter. There existed the mockery of the procedure regarding the issuance and compliance of the LIC, which resulted in a complete mess and resulted in the brutal loss of the amount which affected the business of the Corporation. The corporation on later investigation found out that the person under whose name the policy was confirmed was not in existence. The respondent made the fake establishment of the people for the purpose of committing fraud to which the Life India Corporation instituted the disciplinary proceeding which was made in this behalf to investigate and try and reach out to mitigate the loss by conducting the advance method to traces the funds if possible. The proceeding was much likely in the form of disciplinary action against the respondent, wherein the respondent also participated. The respondent after the thorough course of the proceeding the report was made and submitted to the authority, the officer of the corporation on 17^th April 1997 submitted the report wherein the officer clearly mentioned that the respondent who was also the party to such proceeding accepted all the charges as claimed by the corporation, the person herein respondent was the person who defrauded the company and also concluded the report with acceptance of all charges with no contrary opinions on the above.

The corporation issued the report to the appropriate authority wherein various decision was taken, and the notice was issued to the respondent as to show cause and file reply for the same in which the rationale was sought as to why the authority should not reduce the salary of the respondent to the minimum level under the regulating mentioned in this behalf. The respondent after due consideration to all the offences of corruption, fraud, misconduct, etc. was convicted under the various section of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Prevention of Corruption Act wherein the CBI was involved, and the charges filed against the respondent was proved with the evidence in this behalf supporting the theory of the authorities, the respondent later after filing the suit was convicted and was sentenced rigorous imprisonment for the period of 2 years and the fin that should be paid by the respondent amounting INR 50, 000/-. The respondent, after being convicted personality filed and criminal appeal against the conviction and the appeal that was filed are pending in the High Court. The respondent after the date of first filing filed another motion with the Honorable High Court for suspension of the sentences which was tried and decided by the Single Judge of the High Court.

1. Whether the person is guilty of the offence?
2. Whether the charges framed were in accordance with the law?
3. Whether the High Court orders valid as per the law?
4. Whether their lies any appeal to such order?

The Honorable Supreme Court after hearing the learned counsels representing both the parties in the matter above and considering the facts and the precedents submitted established by the Honorable Judges to support the prayers and pleadings of the parties in the matter above states its observation herein that the court finds all the reason wherein the precedent had a different set of perception when such reliance was placed, the court deciding the above matter in the facts mentioned decides there is no reason to set any precedents wherein the facts were different from the above there cannot be any action in isolation that will be considered for the sake of consideration, and further the respondent herein is convicted of all the offences with respect to the charge sheet filed and so the decision that dismissed the special civil petition filed by the learned Single Judge was appropriate and there exists nothing that has to be seen beyond this.

The Supreme Court after observing the facts of the matter and charges that respondent qualifies so no further reason to decide the matter in a new light, and so the court affirms the decision of the Learned Single Judge of the Court. Further, there is also nothing appropriate about the order of the Division Bench of the High Court and so this court decides to allow the appeal and set aside the order of the Division Bench. The appeal was allowed with no order as to cost.