Advocates:
['M/S AJITH GEETHAN A', '', 'R Jenifar Bibin', '', 'SPL GP MEMO FILED']

W.P.(MD) No.11832 of 2021:

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

DATED: 08.03.2022

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM

W.P.(MD) Nos.11832 & 11833 of 2021

and

W.M.P.(MD) Nos.9293, 9298, 13583 & 13591 of 2021

W.P.(MD) No.11832 of 2021:

S.Krishnamoorthy

... Petitioner

vs.

1.The Superintendent of Police

Thoothukudi District

Thoothukudi

2.The Deputy Superintendent of Police

Rural Sub Division

Thoothukudi

... Respondents

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of

India for issuance of writ of certiorari calling for the records

relating to the impugned order issued by the 1^st respondent herein

vide proceedings in Tha.Pa.No.118/2021, dated 29.06.2021, quash the

same.

For Petitioner

:

Mr.Ajith Geethan.A.

For Respondents :

Mr.N.Satheesh Kumar

Additional Government Pleader

W.P.(MD) No.11833 of 2021:

K.Saravanan

... Petitioner

vs.

1.The Superintendent of Police

Thoothukudi District

Thoothukudi

2.The Deputy Superintendent of Police

Rural Sub Division

Thoothukudi

... Respondents

1/4

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

W.P.(MD) No.11832 of 2021:

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of

India for issuance of writ of certiorari calling for the records

relating to the impugned order issued by the 1^st respondent herein

vide proceedings in Tha.Pa.No.117/2021, dated 29.06.2021, quash the

same.

For Petitioner

:

Mr.Ajith Geethan.A.

For Respondents

:

Mr.N.Satheesh Kumar

Additional Government Pleader

C O M M O N O R D E R

Since the issue involved in both cases are one and the

same, they have been clubbed together, heard together and are being

disposed of by this common order.

2. These two writ petitions are filed interestingly by the

father and son as both are working in the Police Department. The

father, who is the petitioner in W.P.(MD) No.11833 of 2021, is

working as Special Sub Inspector of Police in Central Crime Branch,

Thoothukudi, whereas his son, who is the petitioner in W.P.(MD)

No.11832 of 2021, is working as Grade I Police Constable.

3. The wife of the petitioner (Krishnamoorthy) in W.P.(MD)

No.11832 of 2021 lodged a criminal complaint of dowry harassment.

Based on the said complaint, a criminal case was registered in Crime

No.4 of 2021 against both the petitioners. Simultaneously,

departmental disciplinary proceedings have also been initiated and

charge memos have also been issued to the son as well as his father.

4. The main ground raised by the petitioners is that they

have filed Crl.O.P.(MD) No.18902 of 2021 before this Court, wherein

the parties have compromised the dispute amongst them and the

petitioner – Krishnamoorthy settled a sum of Rs.7,00,000/- (Rupees

seven lakhs only) to the de facto complainant and accordingly, the

criminal original petition was allowed by order dated 07.12.2021.

5. Departmental disciplinary proceedings and the criminal

proceedings are distinct and different. Mere exoneration from the

criminal proceedings would not be a bar for the Authority Competent

to continue the departmental disciplinary proceedings. Misconduct

under the Tamil Nadu Police Conduct Rules is independent and

therefore, the compromise entered into between the parties in the

criminal case is not a ground for quashing the charge memo itself as

it involves disciplinary matters connected with the Uniformed

Services as both the petitioners are working in the Police

Department.

2/4

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

W.P.(MD) No.11832 of 2021:

6. To convict a person under the criminal law, high

standard of proof is required, however, no such strict proof to

punish an employee under the Discipline and Appeal Rules.

Preponderance of probabilities are enough to punish an employee

under the Discipline and Appeal Rules. Action unbecoming of a

public servant is sufficient to pun