A serving police officer has complained to the Crown Office about senior figures at the single force failing to comply with an order of an employment tribunal judge.

Constable Andrew Reid, 37, has written to the prosecution service about the force’s claim that a secret Police Scotland briefing on him could not be identified.

However, he has handed over internal Police Scotland emails which he says show the force knew the disputed document had been produced and circulated internally.

Aamer Anwar, the solicitor acting for Reid, said: “This is a shocking matter.”

Reid and fellow officer Amanda Daly were charged with data protection offences in 2009 when they worked for the old Strathclyde force.

They were accused of illegally accessing police computer records concerning an incident in which they had been attacked.

However, after dozens of court appearances, in a case which cost the taxpayer over £500,000, the pair were acquitted earlier this year.

Sheriff Totten said at the time: “I can find little...which would ultimately prove beyond reasonable doubt that they knowingly or recklessly accessed any electronic systems.”

He went on to say that he was not sure “why it was ever felt necessary to bring criminal charges in this case.”

Reid, who has 15 years’ service and lives in East Kilbride, has now resumed an employment tribunal case against the force that was delayed pending the completion of the criminal trial.

His case called in July and he made a formal request for a historic document on him, which he said was sent from a senior officer in the Professional Standards Department (PSD) to deputy chief constable Neil Richardson.

The judge approved the request and gave the force seven day to hand over the documents.

Police Scotland informed the Tribunal in writing that they had been “unable to identify any documents which fall into the category of paperwork sought by the Claimant”.

On the same day, the single force responded to a Subject Access Request from Reid for the same briefing paper.

According to the force, PSD confirmed that Richardson “would have been” briefed verbally and that “no further briefing” was prepared.

However, in his complaint to the Crown Office, Reid claims he was then mistakenly copied in to internal Police Scotland emails which proves the briefing does exist and had been distributed.

The emails are believed to have been sent two days before Police Scotland informed the tribunal that no documents could be identified.

In his letter to the Crown, Reid stated:

“On Wednesday the 19th August 2015, I returned to work from a period of annual leave to find out that I had accidentally been copied in to an email regarding the request for documents.”

“I now write to you with a formal criminal complaint which I believe should not under any circumstances be investigated by any member of Police Scotland.”

The document requested by Reid is believed to relate to the reasons given internally for why he was originally put on restricted duties.

He has also contacted the Tribunal judge about the matter.

Anwar said: “It is a matter of serious concern if a tribunal is told that a document cannot be identified, but it then emerges that it does exist. It is clear that the Tribunal made an order that Mr Reid should get these documents. Who in Police Scotland decided that the documents should not be provided?

“This is a shocking matter and the advice we gave Mr Reid was that the Crown Office should investigate.”

A Crown Office spokesperson: “The Crown has received correspondence from Mr Reid, which is currently under consideration.”

A Police Scotland spokesperson said: “Due to ongoing civil litigation and internal disciplinary matters, it would be inappropriate to comment at present.”