Madras High Court
G. Ajith vs The Director General Of Police on 30 November, 2022
W.P. No.1520 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 30.11.2022
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ABDUL QUDDHOSE
W.P. No.1520 of 2022
and
W.M.P. No.1661 of 2022
G. Ajith ...Petitioner
vs.
1. The Director General of Police,
Dr. Radhakrishnan Salai,
Mylapore,
Chennai – 600 004.
2. The Superintendent of Police,
Tiruchirappalli District,
Tiruchirappalli. ...Respondents
Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,
to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records in
connection with the impugned order passed by the 2nd respondent in
Na.Ka.No.A2/24400-9/2020, dated 06.01.2022 and quash the same and
further direct the respondents to appoint the petitioner as Grade-II police
constable within a reasonable time with all attendant benefits.
For petitioner : Mr.S.Sivakumar
For respondents : Mr.L.S.M. Hasan Fizal,
Addl. Govt. Pleader for R1 & R2
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
1/6
W.P. No.1520 of 2022
ORDER
This writ petition has been filed challenging the impugned order
passed by the 2nd respondent dated 06.01.2022 under which the petitioner's
selection to the post of Grade II police Constable has been withheld on the
ground that he was involved in a criminal case.
2. Heard Mr.S.Sivakumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and
Mr.L.S.M. Hasan Fizal, learned Additional Government Pleader appearing
for the respondents 1 and 2.
3. The respondents have relied upon Rule 13 of the Tamil Nadu
Police Subordinate Service Rules for withholding the petitioner's selection.
However, the petitioner contends that subsequent to the submission of the
application seeking for subject post, the criminal case in C.C. No.73 of
2019 on the file of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ariyalur has
ended in acquittal by the judgment dated 19.02.2021. The fact that the
criminal case against the petitioner has ended in acquittal is not disputed
by the respondents. The respondents contend that due to the petitioner
being involved in a criminal case they had to withhold his selection and
that they have got the discretion to do so.
4. However, while dealing with somewhat a similar case, this Court
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P. No.1520 of 2022
by its order dated 13.10.2022 passed in W.P. No.13755 of 2020 after
giving due consideration to the fact that the petitioner therein was
involved in trivial criminal offence, which ended in acquittal based on a
compromise reached between the de-facto complainant and the accused,
this Court while interpreting Rule 13 of the Tamil Nadu Police Subordinate
Service Rules held in favour of the said petitioner by holding that in
criminal cases of trivial nature, the respondents cannot blindly apply Rule
13 of the Tamil Nadu Police Subordinate Service Rules and reject the
selection of a candidate who has otherwise satisfied the selection criteria.
This Court had also observed in the aforesaid decision that if that is
allowed, even the rights of the persons implicated in false criminal cases
to get employment in public services will get defeated.
5. Admittedly, in the case on hand, the petitioner was charged for
the offences under Sections 279, 304(A) IPC and 128 of the Motor
Vehicles Act, 1989 and it pertains to a motor accident offence.
6. Admittedly, the said criminal case has also ended in acquittal by
the judgment passed on 19.02.2021 by the learned Chief Judicial
Magistrate, Ariyalur in C.C. No.73 of 2019. Even though the acquittal
may have been rendered subsequent to the deadline fixed for the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P. No.1520 of 2022
submission of the application seeking for the subject post, when the
criminal case involved is a motor accident offence and that too when the
petitioner has been acquitted, the respondents ought to have considered
the said fact. But as seen from the impugned order by total non
application of mind to the said fact, the impugned order has been passed
withholding the petitioner's selection on the ground that he was involved in
a criminal case.
7. For the foregoing reasons, this Court is of the considered view
that the impugned order has to be quashed and the matter has to be
remanded back to the respondents for fresh consideration on merits and in
accordance with law, after giving due consideration to the order dated
13.10.2022 passed by this Court in W.P. No.13755 of 2020 as well as to
the fact that the criminal case which the petitioner was involved is a motor
accident offence and the same has also ended in acquittal in favour of the
petitioner.
8. In the result, the impugned order dated 06.01.2022 passed by the
2nd respondent is hereby quashed and the matter is remanded back to the
2nd respondent for fresh consideration on merits and in accordance with
law.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P. No.1520 of 2022
9. The 2nd respondent is directed to pass final orders on merits and
in accordance with law after giving due consideration to the order dated
13.10.2022 passed by this Court in W.P. No.13755 of 2020 and also after
giving due consideration to the fact that the criminal case involved by the
petitioner is a motor accident offence and the petitioner has been
acquitted by a judgment passed on 19.02.2021 by the learned Chief
Judicial Magistrate, Ariyalur in C.C.No.73 of 2019, within a period of
four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
10. With the aforesaid directions, this Writ Petition is disposed of.
No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
30.11.2022
Index: Yes/No
Internet: Yes/No
Speaking Order/Non-Speaking Order
vsi2
To
1. The Director General of Police,
Dr. Radhakrishnan Salai,
Mylapore,
Chennai – 600 004.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P. No.1520 of 2022
2. The Superintendent of Police,
Tiruchirappalli District,
Tiruchirappalli.
ABDUL QUDDHOSE, J.
vsi2
W.P. No.1520 of 2022
30.11.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
