Court rules sole reliance on unproved CFSL handwriting report without expert testimony violates natural justice; directs reinstatement with back wages, refuses fresh inquiry
In a landmark judgment delivered on October 15, 2026, the Patna High Court set aside the dismissal of Rahul Kumar Gautam, a Probationary Officer at Punjab National Bank (PNB), who was alleged to have procured impersonation during the IBPS Common Written Examination (CWE) held in 2013. The Court held that the disciplinary proceedings against Gautam were fundamentally flawed due to the reliance on an unproved forensic handwriting report from the Central Forensic Science Laboratory (CFSL), Shimla, without examining the expert who authored the report or any other competent witness.
The petitioner, Rahul Kumar Gautam, had qualified the IBPS CWE and was subsequently appointed by PNB in 2015. However, a complaint alleging impersonation during the examination surfaced in 2015, which triggered a departmental inquiry based primarily on the CFSL handwriting analysis. The report concluded that the signatures on certain documents did not match, but the fingerprint analysis was inconclusive due to blurred impressions. Despite this, PNB dismissed Gautam in 2018 for misconduct under the Punjab National Bank Officer Employees (Conduct) Regulations, 1977.
The High Court found that the disciplinary authorities failed to produce or examine the handwriting expert or any other witness to prove the authenticity of the CFSL report, thereby violating the principles of natural justice and procedural fairness. The Court emphasized that while departmental inquiries are not bound by the strict rules of the Indian Evidence Act, findings must be based on legally admissible evidence, and documents must be proved by competent witnesses. Mere marking of exhibits without proof does not establish guilt.
Further, the Court scrutinized the applicability of the misconduct charge under the service regulations since the alleged impersonation occurred prior to the petitioner's employment. It held that pre-employment conduct cannot be treated as misconduct ex post facto unless expressly covered by the regulations.
Rejecting the bank's contention that the inquiry was valid on the balance of probabilities, the Court underscored the frail and inconclusive nature of handwriting expert opinions, citing Supreme Court precedents. The Court also refused to remit the matter for a fresh inquiry, noting the bank had ample opportunity during the original proceedings to prove its case but failed to do so. Consequently, the Court quashed both the dismissal order and the appellate rejection of the petitioner's appeal, and directed the bank to reinstate Rahul Kumar Gautam with continuity of service and payment of back wages from the date of dismissal.
This decision reinforces the judiciary's insistence on procedural fairness and evidentiary rigor in departmental inquiries, especially when serious penalties like dismissal are imposed based on expert reports.
Bottom Line:
Departmental enquiry - Dismissal on allegation of impersonation in pre-employment IBPS examination - Sole reliance on CFSL handwriting report without examining its author or any witness to prove documents - Unproved documents cannot form basis of finding of misconduct - Dismissal and appellate order quashed - Reinstatement with continuity of service and back wages granted - No remand for fresh enquiry.
Statutory provision(s):
Punjab National Bank Officer Employees (Conduct) Regulations, 1977 Regulations 3(1), 24
Rahul Kumar Gautam v. Punjab National Bank, (Patna) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2997831
