Alexraj vs The Commissioner Of Police
2023 Latest Caselaw 5954 Mad

                                                                                 W.P.(MD)No.13628 of 2023



                           BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

                                                      DATED: 12.06.2023

                                                           CORAM

                            THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN

                                                   W.P.(MD)No.13628 of 2023

                     Alexraj                                                  ... Petitioner
                                                              Vs.

                     The Commissioner of Police,
                     Madurai City, Madurai.                                   ... Respondent


                     Prayer: Writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of

                     India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondent to defer the

                     departmental proceedings in PR No.38/2022 U/r.3(b) of TNPSS ( D and

                     A) Rules, 1955 of Madurai City dated 05.05.2022 on the file of the

                     respondent till the disposal of the criminal case in S.C.No.289/21 on the

                     file of the Learned V Additional Sessions Court, Madurai.


                                  For Petitioner     : Mr.Jegadeesh Pandian

                                  For Respondent     : Mr.K.Balasubramani,
                                                           Spl. Government Pleader.




https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                     1/6
                                                                                  W.P.(MD)No.13628 of 2023



                                                           ORDER

Heard the learned counsel for the writ petitioner and the learned

Special Government Pleader for the respondent.

2.The petitioner is figuring as first accused in S.C.No.289 of 2021

on the file of V Additional Sessions Court, Madurai. It is a case of

custodial death. The petitioner is in the rank of Inspector of Police. The

petitioner has been issued with the impugned charge memo. The

co-accused who are also police personnel filed W.P.(MD)Nos.26136 to

26138 of 2022. The said writ petitions were disposed of by me on

18.11.022 in the following terms:-

“4. The learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents submits that this issue had been settled in the decision reported in (2016) 9 SCC 491 (SBI Vs. Neelam Nag). He reminded this Court that there has been a paradigm shift in judicial approach and the writ courts no longer stay the departmental proceedings, even if the criminal prosecution is parallely going on. The contention advanced by the learned Additional Government Pleader is well founded. However, it is https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

W.P.(MD)No.13628 of 2023

relevant to note that the Hon'ble Apex Court in the aforesaid decision followed the earlier decision reported in (2014) 3 SCC 636 (Stanzen Toyotetsu India Private Limited Vs. Girish V.). Paragraph No. 13 of the said Judgment reads that while there is no legal bar to the holding of the disciplinary proceedings and the criminal trial simultaneously, stay of disciplinary proceedings may be an advisable course in cases where the criminal charge against the employee is grave and continuance of the disciplinary proceedings is likely to prejudice their defence before the criminal court. Of-course, the said decision further adds that gravity of the charge is however not by itself enough to determine the question unless the charge involves complicated question of law and fact. It cannot be in dispute that custodial death is a grave charge.

5. In the very nature of things, a case of this nature would involve complicated question of law and fact. I am therefore satisfied that case for stay has been made out. However, as laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court, it is not in the interest of the employer to continue to keep the disciplinary action pending for an indefinitely long time. This is because, criminal cases do not get over early. In the case on hand, the petitioners are not under https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

W.P.(MD)No.13628 of 2023

suspension. In these circumstances, I am inclined to adopt the approach set out in Stanzen case.

6. The Writ Petitions are disposed of with the following directions:-

(i) Before me, A2 to A4 alone are the petitioners. The first accused is not before me. The charges have not been framed. It may not therefore be advisable for this Court to issue any time bound direction to the trial Judge.

(II) If the trial is not completed within one year, the disciplinary proceedings initiated against the petitioners will be taken up. In other words, the impugned action initiated against the petitioners is put on hold for a period of one year. No costs.”

3.I am inclined to adopt the very same approach in the case of the

petitioner also. The impugned disciplinary action shall be put on hold till

18.11.2023. If the criminal case concludes earlier, the departmental

action can also resume immediately thereafter.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

W.P.(MD)No.13628 of 2023

4.This writ petition is disposed of accordingly. No costs.

                                                                              12.06.2023

                     NCC                  : Yes / No
                     Index               : Yes / No
                     Internet            : Yes / No
                     ias

                     To:-

                     The Commissioner of Police,
                     Madurai City, Madurai.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

W.P.(MD)No.13628 of 2023

G.R.SWAMINATHAN,J.

ias

W.P.(MD)No.13628 of 2023

12.06.2023

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis