BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY, J.
J.Chenthil Rajan – Appellant
Versus
The Additional Chief Secretary to the Government – Respondent
W.P.(MD).Nos.29558, 29559 and 29565 of 2023 and W.M.P.(MD).Nos.25521, 25522 and 25523 of 2023
Decided on : 27-11-2024
ORDER :
Prayer in W.P.(MD).No.29558 of 2023 : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, pleased to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus by calling for the entire records pertaining to the proceedings of the 1st respondent in G.O.(Ms) No.24 Home (Police.2) Department, dated 23.01.2023 and quash the same insofar as his decision in not to recommend for criminal proceedings in Crime No.07 of 2022 on the file of the 3rd respondent concerned and consequently, direct the 5th respondent to take up the investigation of the said case and to proceed further in accordance with law.
(Prayer amended vide Court order, dated 15.03.2024 in W.M.P.(MD).No. 5911 of 2024 in W.P.(MD).No.29558 of 2023)
Prayer in W.P.(MD).No.29559 of 2023 : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, pleased to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus by calling for the entire records pertaining to the proceedings of the 1st respondent in G.O.(Ms) No.25 Home (Police.2) Department, dated 23.01.2023 and quash the same insofar as his decision in not to recommend for criminal proceedings in Crime No.07 of 2022 on the file of the 3rd respondent concerned and consequently, direct the 5th respondent to take up the investigation of the said case and to proceed further in accordance with law.
(Prayer amended vide Court order, dated 15.03.2024 in W.M.P.(MD).No. 5907 of 2024 in W.P.(MD).No.29559 of 2023)
Prayer in W.P.(MD).No.29565 of 2023 : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, pleased to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus by calling for the entire records pertaining to the proceedings of the 1st respondent in G.O.(Ms) No.26 Home (Police.2) Department, dated 23.01.2023 and quash the same insofar as his decision in not to recommend for criminal proceedings in Crime No.07 of 2022 on the file of the 3rd respondent concerned and consequently, direct the 5th respondent to take up the investigation of the said case and to proceed further in accordance with law.
(Prayer amended vide Court order, dated 15.03.2024 in W.M.P.(MD).No. 5910 of 2024 in W.P.(MD).No.29565 of 2023)
These Writ Petitions are filed challenging the Government Orders in G.O.(Ms) Nos.24, 25 and 26 Home (Police.2) Department, dated 23.01.2023.
2. By G.O.(Ms). No.24 Home (Police.2) Department, dated 23.01.2023, the Government examined the report of the third respondent/Investigating Authority, accepted the recommendation of the said authority and ordered to drop further action which was made against two Police Officers namely, R.Suresh Kumar, former Deputy Superintendent of Police and Pattani, Inspector of Police. By G.O.(Ms). No.25 Home (Police.2) Department, dated 23.01.2023, disciplinary action was directed to be initiated against the said Pattani, Inspector of Police on the lines mentioned therein. Similarly, by G.O.(Ms).No.26 Home (Police.2) Department, dated 23.01.2023, disciplinary action was directed to be initiated against R.Suresh Kumar, former Deputy Superintendent of Police on the lines mentioned therein. The petitioner, J.Chenthil Rajan, the de facto complainant, on whose complaint the case was registered and investigated, has filed the above Writ Petitions challenging the same.
3. Heard Mr.N.R.Ilango, learned Senior Counsel and Mr.R.Anand, learned Counsel for the petitioner; Ms.Aasha, learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) for the respondent Nos.1 to 5; Mr.M.Maharaja, learned Counsel for the sixth respondent and Mr.M.T.Arunan, learned Counsel for the seventh respondent.
4. Mr.N.R.Ilango, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submits that the issue relates to the dispute between the petitioner and his father namely, Jegatheesan on one side and his father's brother namely, Vaikundarajan, the sixth respondent, on the other side. While so, there have been several legal proceedings between both sides given the number of properties and businesses belonging to the family. There are partnership firms and other entities, regarding w
Government Orders dropping criminal proceedings against police officials were quashed as arbitrary and premature, emphasizing the need for judicial oversight before further action.
Point of law : Service - Department may not be permitted to proceed further at this length of time especially in the context that, all these nine petitioners have been acquitted in the criminal case,....
(1) Merely because list of witnesses was not filed alongwith protest petition, it cannot be said that protest petition cannot be treated as a complaint.(2) Fair, just and proper investigation is esse....
The need for prima facie evidence to proceed against the accused and the limited scope of the court's jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
Disciplinary findings must be based on legally admissible evidence; lack of evidence warrants judicial intervention under Article 226.
The court emphasized the importance of following proper procedures in disciplinary actions and criminal prosecutions based on reports and recommendations.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.