THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE vs V ARUMUGAM
- Court
- Madras High Court
2026:MHC:2846
WA NO. 1850 OF 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 14.07.2026
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM
AND
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N. SENTHILKUMAR
W.A.NO.1850 OF 2026
AND
CMP NO.16678 OF 2026
1.The Director General of Police
Mylapore,
Chennai – 600 004.
2.The Deputy Inspector General of Police
Villupuram Range,
Villupuram – 605 602.
3.The Superintendent of Police
Cuddalore District,
Cuddalore. … Appellants
Vs.
V.Arumuram … Respondent
PRAYER : Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent praying to
set aside the order dated 20.09.2023 passed in W.P.No.4228 of 2020.
For Appellants : Dr.R.Gouri
Government Counsel
For Respondent : Mr.T.K.Saravanan
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 17/07/2026 05:55:18 pm )
2026:MHC:2846
WA NO. 1850 OF 2026
J U D G M E N T
(Judgment of the Court was made by S.M.Subramaniam J.)
Under assail is the writ order dated 20.09.2023 passed in
W.P.No.4228 of 2020. The Director General of Police, Chennai along
with the Deputy Inspector General of Police, Villupuram Range and the
Superintendent of Police, Cuddalore District, filed the present intra court
appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent mainly on the ground that
the order of the writ Court is running counter to the legal principles to be
considered in conduct of departmental disciplinary proceedings.
2.The facts in nutshell are that the respondent was holding
the post of Special Sub-Inspector of Police. While he was working as
Special Sub-Inspector of Police at Arakandanallur Police Station,
Villupuram District, he conducted an investigation in Crime No.55 of 2007
for the offences under Sections 294(b), 324, 326 and 506(ii) of IPC. On
25.11.2014, the respondent appeared before the learned Judicial
Magistrate, Thirukoilur, to adduce evidence in C.C.No.165 of 2007
arising out of Crime No.55 of 2007. He was serving as a Head Constable
at Arakandanallur Police Station, Villupuram District, at the relevant point
of time. When his evidence was being recorded, the learned Judicial
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 17/07/2026 05:55:18 pm )
2026:MHC:2846
WA NO. 1850 OF 2026
Magistrate observed that the respondent appeared to be in a drunken
state and that some alcoholic smell was there from him, since the
witness box is placed nearby the learned Judicial Magistrate. The
respondent had shouted and there was no coherence in his speech.
Immediately, the learned Judicial Magistrate had directed the respondent
to undergo medical examination. One Mr.M.Karthikeyan, Office Assistant
and Mr.M.Gunabalan, Sub-Inspector of Police, Thirukoilur were sent
along with him. The respondent had cooperated with the Medical Officer.
A Certificate of Drunkenness was issued to him. Admittedly, blood and
urine tests were not conducted. The respondent, at that point of time, had
not raised any objection. He was in a drunken mood and kept calm. The
Medical Officer, after examination, concluded that his breath smells
alcohol and accordingly, issued a Drunkenness Certificate.
3.Consequently, the learned Judicial Magistrate, Thirukoilur
sent a complaint against the respondent through the Chief Judicial
Magistrate, Villupuram to the Superintendent of Police, Cuddalore
District. Subsequently, the act of the respondent was flashed in the
newspaper on 26.11.2014 which brought discredit to the police force.
Departmental disciplinary proceedings were initiated against the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 17/07/2026 05:55:18 pm )
2026:MHC:2846
WA NO. 1850 OF 2026
respondent and he was placed under suspension. Thereafter, Charge
Memorandum under Rule 3(b) of the Tamil Nadu Police Subordinate
Service (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1955 was issued. Opportunity
was afforded to the respondent to submit his explanation. Since the
explanation submitted by the delinquent officer / respondent was not
satisfactory, the Disciplinary Authority ordered for a domestic enquiry.
The respondent participated in the domestic enquiry and defended his
case. The only ground taken is that blood and urine tests were not taken.
The Enquiry Officer, after affording an opportunity, submitted his report
holding that the charges were proved. Findings of the Enquiry Officer
was accepted by the Disciplinary Authority and the punishment of
“compulsory retirement from service” was imposed vide order dated
04.05.2015.
4.The respondent preferred a statutory appeal before the
Deputy Inspector General of Police, Villupuram Range. The Appellate
Authority taking a lenient view modified the punishment of compulsory
retirement into that of postponement of his next increment for a period of
three years which shall operate to postpone his future increments, vide
order dated 14.07.2015 and he was allowed to join duty. His Revision
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 17/07/2026 05:55:18 pm )
2026:MHC:2846
WA NO. 1850 OF 2026
Petition filed before the Director General of Police was rejected vide
order dated 31.12.2016.
5.After a lapse of about four years, the respondent filed a
writ petition in the year 2020 challenging the order of modified
punishment as confirmed by the revisional authority. The writ Court
allowed the writ petition mainly on the ground that urine and blood tests
were not conducted.
6.The learned counsel for the respondent would reiterate by
stating that the conduct of urine and blood tests are required for the
purpose of establishing drunkenness. He would rely on certain judgments
to contend that in the absence of blood and urine tests, drunkenness
cannot be established. Therefore, according to him, the order passed by
the Writ Court is in consonance with the judicial precedents.
7.The learned Government Counsel would submit that the
Medical Officer, who examined the respondent immediately, based on
the complaint of the learned Judicial Magistrate, certified that the
respondent was in a drunken state. The respondent also not raised any
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 17/07/2026 05:55:18 pm )
2026:MHC:2846
WA NO. 1850 OF 2026
objection during the relevant point of time when the medical examination
was conducted and the respondent voluntarily submitted himself for the
medical examination. The Sub-Inspector of Police and Constable who
accompanied him were also present. Since it is a departmental
disciplinary proceedings, non-conduct of blood and urine tests need not
be fatal and based on the Drunkenness Certificate of the Medical Officer
and other evidences, the punishment of compulsory retirement was
originally issued, which was later modified by the Appellate Authority to
that of the postponement of his next increment for a period of three years
with cumulative effect. Thus, the writ Court ought not to have interfered
with the said modified punishment.
8.This Court is of the considered view that to convict a
person under the criminal law, the prosecution is required to establish the
charge by strict proof of evidence. However, no such strict proof is
required to punish an employee under the Discipline and Appeal Rules.
Preponderance of probabilities is sufficient to punish a Government
employee under the Discipline and Appeal Rules. In the present case,
Ex-P.6 Certificate of Drunkenness issued by the Medical Officer would be
sufficient to prove the charges framed by the Department. The
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 17/07/2026 05:55:18 pm )
2026:MHC:2846
WA NO. 1850 OF 2026
respondent neither disputed the Certificate of Drunkenness nor raised
any objection during the course of the medical examination.
9.Pertinently, the incident occurred inside the Court Hall and
in the presence of the learned Judicial Magistrate. The learned Judicial
Magistrate, while recording evidence, found that the respondent was in a
drunken state and immediately, directed the Sub-Inspector of Police and
other Constable to take him for medical examination and accordingly,
medical examination was conducted and therefore, there is no reason to
disbelieve the misconduct committed by the respondent inside the Court
Hall and in the present of the learned Judicial Magistrate.
10.The Superintendent of Police / Disciplinary Authority,
while imposing the major penalty of compulsory retirement, recorded a
finding that the Drunkenness Certificate issued by the Medical Officer,
which was filed and marked as Ex-P.6, will prove that he was found in a
drunken state on 25.11.2014, while on duty. Such indifferent attitude of
attending Court in a drunken state has to be viewed seriously.
Departmental action is purely based on preponderance of probability and
his act had totally degraded the image of police force in the Court hall
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 17/07/2026 05:55:18 pm )
2026:MHC:2846
WA NO. 1850 OF 2026
and it has to be curbed, otherwise, the misconduct committed by the
respondent will ruin the entire police force. The respondent had
completed more than 30 years of service. However, he failed to maintain
absolute integrity and devotion to duty while deposing as a witness
before the learned Judicial Magistrate.
11.Witnesses including the police officials, while deposing
before the Courts, in connection with the criminal cases or any other
case, are expected to maintain decorum and discipline and depose the
statement in a truthful manner. This being the settled legal position, any
misconduct committed inside a Court Hall cannot, under any
circumstances, be tolerated.
12.It is brought to the notice of this Court that the police
personnel attending the Courts for deposing are not wearing proper
uniform and maintaining decorum. A Police Officer, a Medical
Practitioner, or any other Professional, while appearing before the Courts
to depose as a witness, has to attend the Courts in the prescribed
uniform, wherever applicable, and to maintain absolute integrity,
discipline, and devotion to duty while deposing evidence before the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 17/07/2026 05:55:18 pm )
2026:MHC:2846
WA NO. 1850 OF 2026
Courts. This discipline inside the Court Halls shall be strictly maintained
by the Judicial Officers. In the event of any indiscipline misconduct or
unusual behaviour on the part of any of the official witnesses, then the
Judicial Officer concerned is bound to file a complaint before the
Competent Authority for initiation of appropriate disciplinary proceedings
and further actions under the relevant provisions of the Act.
13.The Director General of Police, Chennai is directed to
issue a Circular to all the police personnel across the State that the
police officials attending the Courts and while deposing before the
Judicial Officers, shall wear a proper uniform and maintain absolute
integrity and devotion to duty, failing which disciplinary actions will be
initiated. The Director General of Police is directed to issue such a
Circular within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of
this judgment.
14.Registry is directed to communicate a copy of this
judgment to the Director General of Police, Mylapore, Chennai for issuing
appropriate Circular to the Department officials. On issuance of such
Circular by the Director General of Police, the Registrar (Judicial),
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 17/07/2026 05:55:18 pm )
2026:MHC:2846
WA NO. 1850 OF 2026
Madras High Court shall communicate the said Circular to all the Courts
across the State of Tamil Nadu for providing information to the Judicial
Officers.
15.With the above observations, the impugned order dated
20.09.2023 passed in W.P.No.4228 of 2020 is set aside and the writ
appeal stands allowed. However, there shall be no order as to costs.
Consequently, connected Civil Miscellaneous Petition is closed.
[S.M.S., J.] [N.S., J.]
14.07.2026
Index : Yes
Speaking Order : Yes
Neutral Citation : Yes
TK
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 17/07/2026 05:55:18 pm )
2026:MHC:2846
WA NO. 1850 OF 2026
To
1.The Director General of Police
Mylapore,
Chennai – 600 004.
2.The Registrar General
Madras High Court
Chennai – 600 104.
3.The Registrar (Judicial)
Madras High Court
Chennai – 600 104.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 17/07/2026 05:55:18 pm )
2026:MHC:2846
WA NO. 1850 OF 2026
S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.
AND
N.SENTHILKUMAR, J.
TK
W.A.NO.1850 OF 2026
14.07.2026
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 17/07/2026 05:55:18 pm )