M.JAYAPRAKASH vs THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT

W.P.No.25326 of 2023
W.P.No.25326 of 2023
C.KUMARAPPAN, J.
This petition has been listed today under the caption “for being
mentioned” at the instance of learned counsel for the petitioner.
2.Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the question of
suspension does not arise as the petitioner was dismissed from the services. He,
accordingly, prays for appropriate orders.
3.In view of the above, paragraph No.16 of the order passed in
W.P.No.25326 of 2023 dated 17.09.2026 reads as follow:
“15. ……..
“16.In the result, this Writ Petition is allowed. The impugned orders
dated 30.08.2017, 04.01.2018, 31.05.2018 and 20.12.2022 are hereby quashed.
The respondents are directed to reinstate the petitioner in service within a
period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The
period of dismissal shall be taken into account for the purpose of continuity of
service, sans any monetary benefits. No order as to costs. “

4.Registry is directed to make necessary corrections in paragraph No.16
of the order passed in W.P.No.25326 of 2023 dated 17.09.2026 and issue a fresh
order copy to the parties.
__________
Page1 of 14
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/10/2026 01:08:05 pm )

W.P.No.25326 of 2023
C.KUMARAPPAN, J.
KAS
5.This Petition stands clarified accordingly.
13-10-2026
KAS
WP No. 25326 of 2023
__________
Page2 of 14
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/10/2026 01:08:05 pm )

W.P.No.25326 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 17-09-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN
Writ Petition No.25326 of 2023
M.Jayaprakash
S/o.Mani,
No.5/253-1, Periyar Nagar,
Harur,
Dharmapuri District.
..Petitioner
-Vs-
1. The Secretary To Government
Home Department,
Fort St. George,
Chennai- 600 009.
2. The Director General of Police
Mylapore,
Chennai - 600 004.
3. The Commissioner Of Police
Greater Chennai Police,
EVK Sampath Road,
Veppery, Chennai-600 007.
4. The Joint Commissioner of Police
North Chennai, Madhavaram,
Chennai-60.
..Respondents
Writ Petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records of
the respondents in connection with the impugned order passed by the 4th
__________
Page3 of 14
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/10/2026 01:08:05 pm )

W.P.No.25326 of 2023
respondent in PR.No.75/PR.N(2)/2014 u/r 3(b) dated 30.08.2017 and confirmed
rd
by the 3 respondent in PR.No.75/PR.N(2)/2014 Rc.No.PRV(1)/CPO/186/
119182/2017 dated 04.01.2018 and the rejection of Mercy Petition by the 2nd
respondent in Rc.No.30292/AP.3(2)/2018 dated 31.05.2018 and the subsequent
st
rejection order passed by the 1 respondents in G.O.(D)No.1657 Home (Police
-5) Department dated 20.12.2022 and quash the same and further direct the
respondents to reinstate the petitioner into service with all consequential service
and monetary benefits within reasonable time..
For Petitioner: Mr.S.Sivakumar
For Respondents: Mr.S.Ilanvaludhi,
Spl G.P
ORDER
The present writ petition has been filed challenging the orders impugned
dated 30.08.2017, 04.01.2018, 31.05.2018 and 2012.2022, whereby the
punishment of removal from service imposed on the petitioner was confirmed
and his mercy petition was rejected.
2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the
petitioner entered into service as a Grade-II Police Constable through Tamil
Nadu Uniformed Services Recruitment Board on 01.03.2008. In the meanwhile,
the marriage proposal was arranged between the petitioner and one Durga and
the marriage date was fixed on 02.06.2014. In the meantime, the deceased
Durga, consumed rat poison and despite treatment died on 06.06.2014.
__________
Page4 of 14
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/10/2026 01:08:05 pm )

W.P.No.25326 of 2023
Thereafter, a complaint was lodged by the father of the deceased. Pursuant to
which, First Information Report came to be registered as Crime No. 158 of
2014. Subsequently, a charge memorandum was issued against the petitioner on
18.01.2015, which reads as follows:-
__________
Page5 of 14
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/10/2026 01:08:05 pm )

W.P.No.25326 of 2023
3. Pursuant to the charge memo, an enquiry was conducted. On the side
of the prosecution, three witnesses were examined. After issuance of the charge
memorandum and receipt of the petitioner’s explanation, the enquiry officer
was appointed. Before the Enquiry Officer, the father of the deceased and two
departmental witnesses were examined. The enquiry officer has given a positive
finding. Based on the said finding, the petitioner was removed from service, by
order dated 30.08.2017. Thereafter, the petitioner filed a mercy petition and
memorial petition, but both were came to be rejected. Hence, the present writ
petition has been filed.
4. Heard Mr.S.Sivakumar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner
and Mr.S.Illanvaludhi, learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the
respondents and perused the materials available on record.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the departmental
enquiry was conducted in a hurried manner and as a result, the finding rendered
by the Enquiry Officer is perverse. He further submitted that the punishment
imposed against the petitioner is wholly disproportionate to the materials
available on record. The learned counsel for the petitioner draw the attention of
this Court to the statement of the victim’s father namely, Mr.Gnanasekaran,
wherein he had stated that his daughter Durga consumed poison on account of
__________
Page6 of 14
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/10/2026 01:08:05 pm )

W.P.No.25326 of 2023
the alleged demand of dowry. In substance, the petitioner had abetted the victim
to commit suicide.
6. To substantiate the said contention, the learned counsel submitted that
the departmental witness namely, Mr.Gnanasekaran, had deposed that the
petitioner along with about 30 members came to their residence in connection
with the marriage arrangements. Thereafter, they asked the bride’s father to
come to the petitioner’s residence and made a further dowry demand of 25
sovereigns of gold. According to the Department, when the said demand was
informed to the deceased, she became depressed and later on, consumed
poison.
7. It is further stated by the department witness that on 29.05.2014, the
petitioner also met the deceased and demanded dowry and that, on account of
such demand, she took the extreme step. The learned counsel for the petitioner,
however, submitted that, when the deceased was found to have consumed
poison and was in a serious condition since 01.6.2014, there was no explanation
as to why the First Information Report was not registered immediately and the
FIR was registered after the death of the victim on 06.06.2014, with the delay of
6 days. He further submitted that the investigating officer, who was examined
nd
by the department, as 2 witness, had not at all recorded any statement from the
deceased as she was not in a position to speak. The above glaring aspects
__________
Page7 of 14
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/10/2026 01:08:05 pm )

W.P.No.25326 of 2023
clearly reflects the way in which the father of the victim has dealt with the
matter.
8. It is also the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that
according to the department-respondent, the victim was really not in a position
to give dying declaration. But, the very statement made by the father of the
victim that, on 01.06.2014 evening they were planned to have a usual pre-
wedding rituals. It is also the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner
that even according to the department witness, there are material to say that the
previous two marriage proposals of the victim was aborted. But this aspect was
not considered by the Disciplinary Authority.
9. The learned counsel would also submit that there was a possibility that
the victim might have died on account of some misinformation of the victim’s
father. Hence, it is the specific submission of the learned counsel for the
petitioner that the finding rendered by the enquiry officer does not satisfy the
test of preponderance of probabilities. That apart, the learned counsel for the
petitioner also placed reliance upon the judgment rendered in the criminal case
in S.C.No.105 of 2018, by which the petitioner was acquitted vide judgment
dated 16.02.2024. In the said judgment, the learned Judge had recorded that the
department witness namely, Mr.Gnanasekaran has deposed before the Criminal
Court that he did not know the reason as to why the deceased consumed poison.
__________
Page8 of 14
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/10/2026 01:08:05 pm )

W.P.No.25326 of 2023
10. Further, the victim’s mother, brother and sister also had stated that
rd
the deceased was in the depression on account of her forced 3 marriage as she
was very much interested in pursuing her studies. Hence, the learned counsel
prayed for allowing the writ petition.
11. Per contra, the learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the
respondents submitted that the mere availability of an alternative possible view
cannot be a reason to interfere with the finding of the Enquiry Officer. The
learned Special Government Pleader submitted that the petitioner was a Police
Constable and had been granted 45 days leave for the purpose of his marriage.
During the said period, he had visited the residence of the deceased along with
about 30 persons in connection with the marriage arrangements. Therefore, the
petitioner would have been aware of the circumstances relating to the deceased
and her family.
12. The contention of the petitioner that the death of the deceased was
only on account of not informing about her previous two marriage proposal is
merely his assumption and the same cannot be a justifiable reason. Merely
because her father Mr.Gnanasekaran admitted in such a way, it will not make
the finding given by the Enquiry Officer, become perverse. The learned Special
Government Pleader further submitted that merely because the petitioner was
__________
Page9 of 14
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/10/2026 01:08:05 pm )

W.P.No.25326 of 2023
acquitted in the criminal case, the said acquittal by itself will not invalidate the
departmental proceedings or the finding rendered therein. Hence, he prayed for
dismissal of the writ petition.
13. I have given my anxious consideration to the submissions made on
either side and perused the materials available on record.
14. It is a well-settled principle of law that t he scope of judicial review is
very limited. Unless the finding becomes perverse, or if the finding will not
stand the test of preponderance of probabilities, only then Judicial review would
arise. In order to arrive at a conclusion that the findings of the Enquiry Officer
would become perverse, an initial or threshold level of scrutiny may be
undertaken.
15. In such exercise, this Court is of the view that the finding rendered by
the Enquiry Officer become perverse for the following reasons:-
(i)Even according to the Disciplinary Authority, on 01.06.2014, they had
planned to perform the pre-wedding rituals. But, the investigating officer had
deposed before the disciplinary authority that after consuming poison, the
deceased was not in a position to speak and therefore, she was not in a position
to give a dying declaration. Both the statements are inherently inconsistent. As
rightly contended by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, the father
__________
Page10 of 14
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/10/2026 01:08:05 pm )

W.P.No.25326 of 2023
of the deceased had hopes for marriage and further he did not give police
compliant until her death. If really there was an abatement of suicide by the
petitioner, no father would give her daughter to such a diabolical person.
(ii)Furthermore, while looking into the admissions made by the victim’s
father the factum of previous attempt of two marriage proposals of the victim,
and later dropped, was not considered by the disciplinary authority. Here except
the victim father, there are no witnesses to substantiate the charge. Infact, the
victim was alive for 6 days after the alleged consumption of poison. Here, the
victim did not say anything. According to the department witnesses, the victim
was stable even after consumption of poison.
(iii) To the extent indicated above, in arriving at the aforesaid conclusion,
this Court also relies upon the admission given by the departmental witnesses in
the criminal case in S.C.No.105 of 2018, wherein the petitioner was later tried
on the similar set of charge relying similar set of witnesses and documents, but
ended in acquittal on 16.02.2024. While arriving at the conclusion of acquittal
the learned Sessions Judge has recorded, in paragraph No.24, as follows:-
“But the witnesses examined in the prosecution side, who
made arrangement of the marriage has not spoken anything
about the demand of dowry by the accused and A1 refused
to marry the PW-1’s daughter, thereby instigating her to
commit suicide. More particularly PW-2 and PW-5
categorically deposed that the deceased Durga want to
study further and not interested in marriage and consumed
__________
Page11 of 14
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/10/2026 01:08:05 pm )

W.P.No.25326 of 2023
rat paste. PW-9 also deposed that her sister does not like
the marriage. PW-1 father of the deceased Durga, who
lodge the Ex.P1 complaint also deposed that he does not
know why his daughter has consumed poison. Therefore,
the prosecution witnesses, who made arrangement of the
marriage of the deceased Durga with A1 has not deposed
anything against the accused implicating them in the
commission of offence. Hence, from the available evidence
and also from the materials on record, the prosecution has
failed to prove all the charges levelled against the accused.”
(iv)According to the depositions of the mother (PW-2), brother(PW-5)
and sister (PW-9), before the Criminal Court, the deceased was depressed on
account of the forced marriage, as she was very much interested in pursuing her
studies. Further, looking at the statement of Gnanasekaran, the father of the
deceased, who is the star witness in the disciplinary proceedings, he depose that
he did not know the reason as to why the deceased had consumed poison.
(v) If we look at the above statement given before the Criminal Court, in
the backdrop of the finding rendered herein above, it would vindicate that the
finding rendered by the Enquiry Officer is not sustainable. As a result of which,
the punishment imposed by the Disciplinary Authority and confirmed by the
Appellate Authority and the subsequent orders rejecting the mercy petition are
liable to be interfered with.
16. In the result, this Writ Petition is allowed. The impugned orders
dated 30.08.2017, 04.01.2018, 31.05.2018 and 20.12.2022 are hereby quashed.
__________
Page12 of 14
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/10/2026 01:08:05 pm )

W.P.No.25326 of 2023
The respondents are directed to reinstate the petitioner in service within a period
of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The period of
dismissal shall be taken into account for the purpose of continuity of service,
sans any monetary benefits. No order as to costs.
17-09-2026
ari
Index:yes
Internet:yes
Speaking order
Neutral citation:yes
To
1. The Secretary to Government,Home Department,Fort St. George,,Chennai-
600 009.
2. The Director General of Police,Mylapore,Chennai - 600 004.
3. The Commissioner of Police,Greater Chennai Police, EVK Sampath Road,
Veppery, Chennai-600 007.
4.The Joint Commissioner of Police,North Chennai, Madhavaram, Chennai-60.
C.KUMARAPPAN, J.
ari
__________
Page13 of 14
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/10/2026 01:08:05 pm )

W.P.No.25326 of 2023
W.P.No. 25326 of 2023
17.09.2026
__________
Page14 of 14
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/10/2026 01:08:05 pm )