Madras High Court
Suman vs The Deputy Inspector General Of Police on 19 June, 2025
W.P No.23124 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 19.06.2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN
Writ Petition No.23124 of 2024
Suman
S/o.R.K.Swami
ACIO-II/Exe PIS No.220923
Sub Inspector of Police-(now Under suspension)
Formerly Bureau of Immigration,
Chennai International Airport,
No.6, PallaStreet, Vettavalam Village,
Thiruvannamalai District ... Petitioner
..Vs..
1.The Deputy Inspector General of Police,
Vellore Range, Vellore.
2.The Deputy Superintendent of Police,
Thiruvannamali Town Sub-Division,
Thiruvannamalai District.
3.Foreigners Regional Registration Officer & Disciplinary Authority,
Bureau of Immigration,
No.26, SastriBavan, Haddows Road,
Nungambakkam, Chennai – 600 006. ... Respondents
PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,
praying to issue a writ of Mandamus to defer the 1st respondent from
conducting the disciplinary proceedings vide charge memo P.R.No.26/2024
1/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 24/06/2025 04:25:57 pm )
W.P No.23124 of 2024
against the petitioner pending disposal of the criminal proceedings in Crime
No.14/2023 on the file of the District Crime Branch, Thiruvannamalai.
For Petitioner : Mr.S.Veeraraghavan
For Respondents : Mr.R.U.Dinesh Raj Kumar,
Additional Government Pleader
For RR1 & 2
ORDER
The present writ petition has been filed to defer the 1st respondent from
conducting the disciplinary proceedings vide Charge Memo P.R.No.26/2024
against the petitioner pending disposal of the criminal proceedings in Crime
No.14/2023 on the file of the District Crime Branch, Thiruvannamalai.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that, he is
directly appointed as Sub Inspector of Police in 2017. The learned counsel
further submits that under the false charge of assisting his wife in the
competitive exam conducted for the post of Sub Inspector of Police, he was
issued with a charge memorandum dated 27.02.2024, and also a criminal
complaint was also registered against him on 30.09.2023 in Crime
No.14/2023. It is the specific submission of the petitioner that if the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 24/06/2025 04:25:57 pm )
disciplinary proceedings is allowed to continue then, his valuable rights of the
defence before the criminal Court would be jeopardized. Therefore, he prays
an order to stay the departmental proceedings till the completion of the
criminal proceedings initiated based upon the Crime No.14/2023.
3. Per contra, the learned Additional Government pleader would
vehemently submit that pendency of the criminal proceedings would in no
way bar for the respondent to proceed with the disciplinary proceedings, and
would invite the attention of this Court in respect of G.O.(Ms) No.66, Human
Resources Management (N) Department, dated 06.07.2022 and also referred
the Judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Re State of
Rajasthan & others v. Phool Singh reported in 2022 SCC Online SC 1140.
4. I have given my anxious consideration of either side submission.
5. It is well settled principle of law that mere pendency of the criminal
proceedings is not a bar for the disciplinary authority to proceed with a
departmental enquiry. As we all know, the proof before the criminal Court is
beyond reasonable doubt whereas, the proof before the disciplinary
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 24/06/2025 04:25:57 pm )
proceedings is preponderance of probabilities. In this connection it is
appropriate to refer the Judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of
Re State of Rajast han & others v. Phool Singh reported in 2022 SCC
Online SC 1140 in para 10 as follows:
“10. ... A departmental proceeding is different from a
criminal proceeding. The fundamental difference between the
two is that whereas in a departmental proceeding a delinquent
employee can be held guilty on the basis of “preponderance of
probabilities”, in a criminal court the prosecution has to
prove its case “beyond reasonable doubt”. In short, the
difference between the two proceedings would lie in the nature
of evidence and the degree of its scrutiny. The two forums
therefore run at different levels. For this reason, this Court
has consistently held that merely because a person has been
acquitted in a criminal trial, he cannot be ipso facto reinstated
in service.”
6. Apart from the above, as per G.O.Ms.No.66, dated 06.07.2022 the
disciplinary authority can conduct disciplinary proceedings, parallelly along
with the criminal proceedings.
7. At this juncture, the learned counsel for the petitioner would raise
objection that the respondent-Dept is not proceeding with the enquiry by
following the natural justice.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 24/06/2025 04:25:57 pm )
8. However, such submission cannot be taken in the present
proceedings as the only ground urged by the petitioner in the present writ
petition is if disciplinary proceedings is not stayed, he can't have effective
defence, as his defence become known to the prosecution. Therefore, since
defence is effective, the same is in contrary to the above settled legal
principles.
9. In such view of the matter, this Court do not find any merits in the
present writ petition. Hence, the writ petition is dismissed. No costs.
19.06.2025
ssi
Index : Yes
Internet : Yes
Neutral Citation Case: Yes/No
To:
1.The Deputy Inspector General of Police,
Vellore Range, Vellore.
2.The Deputy Superintendent of Police,
Thiruvannamali Town Sub-Division,
Thiruvannamalai District.
3.Foreigners Regional Registration Officer & Disciplinary Authority,
Bureau of Immigration, No.26, SastriBavan, Haddows Road,
Nungambakkam, Chennai – 600 006.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 24/06/2025 04:25:57 pm )
C.KUMARAPPAN, J.
ssi
19.06.2025
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 24/06/2025 04:25:57 pm )
