Recovery of pecuniary loss from pension

One Punjab Govt employee has criminal proceedings in the trial court. Now she died. Court abate proceedings. Can Recovery from Pension of pecuniary loss caused to Government be made even criminal proceedings abate. If the pension is claimed by Legal Heirs. What is fate? Can pecuniary loss cause to Government be recovered from Legal Heirs?

One Punjab Govt employee has criminal proceedings in the trial court. Now she died. Court abate proceedings. Can Recovery from Pension of pecuniary loss caused to Government be made even criminal proceedings abate. If the pension is claimed by Legal Heirs. What is fate? Can pecuniary loss cause to Government be recovered from Legal Heirs?

The abatement of proceedings against an accused has an effect of discharge/acquittal as the case may be. If a proceeding is abated before framing of charge then accused shall be treated as discharged else acquitted.

In both conditions, he is innocent in the eye of law. In your case, the criminal proceeding is abated because of his death and he shall be either discharged or acquitted by the court. In both conditions recovery of pecuniary loss cannot be recovered from his pension.

Pension is the self-earned property of the employee, according to section 60 of the CPC it cannot be attached. 

Recovery of pecuniary loss from the pension of a government employee is prerogative of the Governor. Governor takes such decision either on the findings of departmental inquiry or criminal proceeding.

A criminal proceeding is now abated so the Governor may take such decision on the finding of the departmental proceeding if it is still in process or completed. But in each and every case it is mandatory for the government to declare the employee guilty of misconduct.

Shivendra Pratap Singh

Shivendra Pratap Singh

Advocate

Advocate Shivendra, practicing law since 2005, specializes in criminal and matrimonial cases, extensive litigatin experience before the High Court, Sessions court & Family Court. He established kanoonirai.com in 2014 to provide dependable and pragmatic legal support. Over the years, he has successfully assisted thousands of clients, making the platform a trusted resource for criminal and matrimonial dispute resolution in India.

Related Matters

Husband is demanding DNA test to check the paternity of our son in divorce case

The law does not permit a husband to compel his wife or child to undergo a DNA test merely on the basis of suspicion. In Gautam Kundu v. State of West Bengal (1993) 3 SCC 418, the Supreme Court held that a blood or DNA test cannot be directed as a matter of course. Before seeking such a direction, the husband must establish a strong prima facie case by proving that he had no access to his wife during the period when the child could have been conceived.

क्या चेक बाउंस का केस मियाद समाप्त होने के बाद भी दाखिल हो सकता है

Negotiable Instruments Act के अंतर्गत, वैधानिक अवधि समाप्त होने के बाद भी चेक बाउंस का मामला दायर किया जा सकता है। यदि शिकायतकर्ता देरी का उचित कारण प्रस्तुत करता है, तो न्यायालय विलंब को क्षमा कर शिकायत स्वीकार कर सकता है। नोटिस के बाद निर्धारित समय में भुगतान न होने पर कार्यवाही प्रारंभ की जा सकती है।

Cancellation of bail when accused tempering with witness

Seeking the cancellation of bail is possible when an accused person tampers with witnesses or influences a trial. This guide explains legal grounds for such actions, focusing on mandatory procedures under Section 15-A of the SC/ST Act and post-bail threats. Learn how victims can approach higher courts to ensure a fair trial and protect their rights.

Evidence of interested witness is admissible in criminal proceedings

In criminal law, the testimony of a related witness cannot be discarded solely due to their relationship with the victim. This legal overview clarifies the distinction between related and interested witnesses, citing key Supreme Court rulings. It explains how natural witnesses provide admissible evidence that reliably forms the basis for a conviction, even without independent corroboration.

SDM cannot attach property under section 146 crpc when civil suit is pending

A Sub-Divisional Magistrate cannot legally attach property under Section 146 of the CrPC if a civil suit regarding the same property is already pending. This guide explains why such orders lack jurisdiction and outlines the proper legal remedy, including filing a petition under Section 482 CrPC to the High Court based on established Supreme Court precedents.