BEFORE

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE N. UNNI KRISHNAN NAIR

JUDGMENT AND ORDER (CAV)

Date : 18-05-2026

Heard Mr. Toshi O Longkumer, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. A. Ayemi, learned Government Advocate for the State respondents.

2. The challenge in this present writ petition is to an order dated 30.11.2023, issued by the Superintendent of Police, Mokokchung, Nagaland imposing the penalty of dismissal from service upon the petitioner on conclusion of a departmental proceeding instituted against him.

3. The facts in brief requisite for adjudication of the issues arising in the present writ petition is noticed as under.

4. The petitioner was issued with a show cause notice requiring him to explain with regard to his consumption, use and procurement of Narcotic substances. While such show cause notice was pending, the petitioner was arrested on 01.07.2023, in connection with Mokokchung PS case no. 12/2023 registered under Section 21(b) of the NDPS Act basing on an allegation of possession of contraband substances. On the petitioner being placed under detention, the Superintendent of Police, Mokokchung, Nagaland vide order dated 03.07.2023, proceeded to place the petitioner under suspension pending drawal of departmental proceeding against him. Thereafter, a Memorandum of Charge dated 04.07.2023, came to be issued to the petitioner framing 2 (two) Article of Charge, therein. On the same date, vide an order dated 04.07.2023, the Disciplinary Authority of the petitioner proceeded to direct for holding of an enquiry with regard to the charges framed against the petitioner vide the Memorandum of Charge dated 04.07.2023 and for that purpose appointed an Enquiry Officer as well as a Presenting Officer. It is to be noted that at that relevant point of time, the petitioner in connection with police case instituted against him, was behind the bars.

5. It is projected in the writ petition that although the petitioner was behind bars, he had prepared a written statement of defence against the said Memorandum of Charge dated 04.07.2023, however, he was not allowed to submit the same by the Disciplinary Authority. It is projected that an enquiry was held within the jail premises, wherein, the petitioner was so detained and on conclusion of the said enquiry, the Enquiry Officer submitted a report in the matter holding the charges levelled against the petitioner to have been established. The Disciplinary Authority of the petitioner, on a perusal of the said Enquiry report, without, however, forwarding a copy thereof to the petitioner, proceeded vide the order dated 30.11.2023, to concur with the findings of the Enquiry Officer and thereby, held the charges levelled against the petitioner vide the Memorandum of Charge dated 04.07.2023 to have been established.

6. Basing on the said conclusion, the petitioner came to be imposed with the penalty of dismissal from service. The petitioner thereafter submitted a representation dated 11.03.2025 before the Director General of Police, Nagaland praying for revocation of the order of penalty on the ground that he was not given all due opportunity to defend his case during the enquiry. The said representation, however, not being considered, the petitioner had instituted the present proceeding.

7. Mr. Toshi O Longkumer, learned counsel for the petitioner by reiterating the facts noted, herein above, at the outset has submitted that although the enquiry was conducted in the presence of the petitioner, the said enquiry was so conducted within the jail premises. He submits that the petitioner had participated in the enquiry, however, he being under detention, it cannot be expected that the petitioner had so participated in the enquiry with a free mind.

8. Mr. Longkumer, learned counsel submits that the Enquiry Officer while carrying out the enquiry had not permitted the petitioner to cross-examine the departmental witnesses deposing in the matter. He submits that the Enquiry Officer had thereafter, submitte