S BASKARAN Vs. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN the above writ petitions, petitioners seeks to forbear the respondents from proceeding with the departmental enquiries contemplated in the proceedings in T.P.No.19/06 and T.P.No.18/06 respectively, both dated 17.2.2006, under rule 3(b) of the Tamil Nadu Police Subordinate Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1955, pending disposal of the criminal case on the file of the learned 8th Metropolitan Magistrate, George Town, Chennai in Crime No.447/2005 on the file of the Yanaikoundi Police Station.

(2.) THE brief facts necessary for disposal of the writ petitions are that the petitioner in W.P.No.3960 of 2006 joined in the Police Department as Constable on 7.2.1997 and now he is working as Head Constable (Batch No.178) at Thirunagar P5 Police Station. Petitioner in W.P.No.4075 of 2006 was appointed as Police Constable on 25.5.1998 and he is now working as Grade-I Police Constable (Batch No.778) at Thirumangalam Police Station. THE first respondent issued a charge memo under Section 3(b) of the Tamil Nadu Police Subordinate Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1955, in his proceedings T.P.No.19/06 and T.P.No.18/06 respectively on 17.2.2006 and placed the petitioners under suspension pending enquiry into the criminal charges. Totally seven charges are framed against the petitioners separately. Petitioners further states that a criminal case is registered in Yanaikoundi Police Station in Cr.No.447 of 2005 for the offences under Sections 341, 323, 506(i), 392 and 395 I.P.C. and the case is pending before the learned 8th Metropolitan Magistrate, George Town, Chennai. THE second respondent was appointed as Enquiry Officer to enquire into the charges levelled against the petitioners. By representation dated 24.7.2006, petitioners requested the second respondent to keep the disciplinary proceeding in abeyance, pending criminal case before the 8th Metropolitan Magistrate, George Town, Chennai on the ground that the charges contemplated in the departmental proceedings and the subject matter of the criminal case are one and the same and the petitioners are innocent persons and is a victim of the circumstances. According to the petitioners the said request having not been considered, these writ petitions are filed with the above mentioned prayer.

(3.) ON the basis of the averments made in the additional affidavit, I have called for the original files in connection with PC 265 Meenakshisundaram of Armed Reserve, Ramnad District, now on duty at S.B., C.I.D., Madurai. It is seen from the records that the said Meenakshisundaram was suspended by order dated 17.6.2005 due to his involvement in the criminal case. ON the report given by the Commissioner of Police, Chennai 8 to the Director General of Police, Chennai 2, through proceeding dated 9.6.2005 a report was submitted about the involvement of the said Meenakshisundaram, petitioners and others in the criminal case, their arrest and about the recovery of amount. It is also seen from the records that the Deputy Superintendent of Police, in charge of Armed Reserve, Ramanathapuram conducted a preliminary enquiry and submitted a report to the Superintendent of Police, Ramanathapuram and recommended to take disciplinary action through his report dated 22.8.2005 and charge memo was also issued by the Superintendent of Police, Ramanathapuram in T.P.No.77 of 2005 dated 30.8.2005, which contains four charges. It is seen from the file that the Additional Superintendent of Police, Crimes, Ramanathapuram conducted enquiry and found that the charges 1, 2 and 4 are against the said Meenakshisundaram are proved and subsequently the order of suspension was revoked without prejudice to the criminal case pending against him in Cr.No.447 of 2005 pending before the C2 Elephant Gate Police Station.