New Delhi: The Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) has ordered the reinstatement of two Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) personnel who were dismissed from service in separate cases in 2021 without regular departmental inquiries, ruling that the agency had failed to establish sufficient grounds for bypassing the prescribed disciplinary process.
In two separate orders pronounced on October 13, 2026, the CAT Principal Bench set aside the dismissal orders of former CBI Sub-Inspector Abhishek Tiwari and Head Constable Kewal Ram. The tribunal directed their reinstatement with continuity of service, while leaving the question of back wages and other monetary benefits to the competent authority.
Both officers had been dismissed by invoking Article 311(2)(b) of the Constitution, which permits the authorities to dispense with a departmental inquiry under specific circumstances when holding one is not reasonably practicable.
The tribunal, however, held that the seriousness of the allegations and general apprehensions about witness intimidation, workplace concerns, or the impact on investigations were not sufficient by themselves to justify bypassing a regular inquiry.
Confidential Information Case Involving Former Sub-Inspector
In the case involving Abhishek Tiwari, a former CBI Sub-Inspector, the agency had dismissed him on September 3, 2021, over allegations that he had disclosed confidential information and documents relating to a preliminary inquiry and a regular case to advocate Anand Dilip Daga in exchange for an iPhone 12 Pro.
The allegations led to the registration of a separate criminal case, RC2182021A0005, on August 31, 2021. Tiwari was arrested on September 1, 2021.
The CBI had argued that the alleged disclosure of confidential information could compromise its investigations. It also cited apprehensions about witness intimidation, difficulties in securing witnesses, administrative complications, and the potential impact on the agency's credibility and morale.
The tribunal found that the material placed before it did not establish that any witness had been threatened or intimidated, or that witnesses were unwilling to participate in a departmental inquiry. It also noted that the authorities had not adequately demonstrated why safeguards could not have been used to protect confidential information and witness identities.
The CAT observed that the decision to dispense with the inquiry had been reached within days of the criminal case being registered, without sufficient material to establish that a regular departmental proceeding was impracticable.
It consequently quashed Tiwari's dismissal and ordered his reinstatement with continuity of service.
Head Constable Dismissed Over Sexual Harassment Allegations
In the separate case involving Kewal Ram, a former Head Constable attached to the CBI's Banking, Securities and Fraud Branch, the agency had dismissed him on October 5, 2021, following allegations of inappropriate physical contact with a female contractual cleaning worker at the CBI headquarters.
According to the case records, the incident allegedly took place on September 24, 2021. A criminal case was registered on September 29, and Ram was arrested on October 3.
The CBI had justified dispensing with a departmental inquiry by citing concerns that the complainant could be influenced or intimidated, the possibility of further harassment, workplace morale, and the nature of the alleged conduct. The agency also referred to a previous disciplinary punishment imposed on Ram in 2010, when two increments were withheld.
A charge sheet was filed against him on December 29, 2021, under Sections 354 and 354-A of the Indian Penal Code. He was subsequently acquitted by a Chief Metropolitan Magistrate in New Delhi on September 15, 2022, after the complainant failed to identify him during the trial, according to the case records.
While examining the dismissal, the tribunal held that the seriousness of the allegations, the complainant's status as an outsourced worker and general concerns about possible intimidation or workplace safety did not, without a specific factual basis, establish that a departmental inquiry could not reasonably be conducted.
The CAT accordingly set aside Ram's dismissal and the consequential office order. It also set aside the eviction order concerning his official accommodation to the extent that it was based on his dismissal, leaving his entitlement to accommodation to be considered under the applicable rules.
Reinstatement Does Not Mean Exoneration
In both cases, the tribunal directed the competent authority to consider the officers' claims for back wages and other monetary benefits, preferably within three months of receiving a certified copy of the respective orders.
The CAT also clarified that its decisions did not amount to a finding that the allegations against either officer were false or that they had been exonerated. The CBI remains free to initiate or continue disciplinary proceedings in accordance with the law.