PONNANANCHA PERUMAL Vs. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner while working as Grade I Constable, was served with the charge memo vide P.R.No.21/2000 under Rule 3(b)of Tamil Nadu Police Subordinate Service (Disciplinary and Appeal) Rules, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rule').

(2.) THE allegations against petitioner was that, he was found under the influence of liquor, on duty and that when the Sub-Inspector was signing the Beat Book, the petitioner took away the Beat Book and ran away.

(3.) THE explanation submitted by the petitioner to the charge memo was not found to be satisfactory. The Deputy Superintendent of Police was appointed as Enquiry Officer to go into the charges. The Sub-Inspector of Police appeared as a prosecution witness and supported the allegations against the petitioner. The petitioner was given full opportunity to defend himself before the Enquiry Officer and was allowed to cross-examine the Sub-Inspector.