Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

MARUDHACHALAM versus THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF POLICE

High Court of Madras

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Marudhachalam v. The Deputy Commissioner of Police - W.P.(MD)No.1156 of 2006 [2007] RD-TN 154 (11 January 2007)

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

DATED: 11/01/2007

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE K.SUGUNA

W.P.(MD)No.1156 of 2006

Marudhachalam,

Head Constable 388,

Palakkarai Police Station,

Tiruchirapalli-1

residing at

F-9, Police Quarters,

Chinthamani,

Tiruchirapalli-620 002. .. Petitioner Vs.

The Deputy Commissioner of Police,

Law and Order,

Tiruchirapalli. .. Respondent PRAYER

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issuance of a Writ of certiorari to call for the records pertaining to the proceedings passed by the respondent in P.R.No.49 of 2004 dated 30.08.2004 and to quash the same.

For Petitioner ... Mr.S.K.Mani

For Respondent ... Mr. A. Sundarrajan, Government Advocate. :ORDER



This writ petition has been filed challenging the charge memo issued in P.R.No.49 of 2004, dated 30.08.2004. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the allegations leveled in the charge memo is as follows:- ,izg;g[ -1

"jiyik fhtyh; 388 jpU. kUjhr;ryk;> ghyf;fiu fhty; epiyak;> jpUr;rp khefuk;

Fw;wk; : ePh; ckJ kidtp jpUkjp ePyhtjp vd;fpw ePyh capUld; ,Uf;Fk; nghJ jpUkjp ghg;gh vd;gtiu jpUkzk; bra;jJ fl;Lg;ghLkpf;f fhty;Jiwapy; 1964-k; Mz;L rhh;epiy gzpahsh;fs; elj;ij tpjpfSf;F g[wk;ghf ,uz;L jpUkzq;fs; bra;J bfhz;l xGq;fpdkhd Fw;wk;.

2. ckf;F muR mspf;ftpUf;Fk; Xa;t{jpa gyd;fis ckJ kidtp jpUkjp ePyhtjp vd;fpw ePy bgWtjw;F gjpyhf jpUkjp ghg;gh bgw;Wf;bfhs;Sk; tifapy; thhpR epakd gotk; kw;Wk; Xa;t{jpa gotq;fspy; jpUkjp ghg;ghtpd; bgaiu Fwpj;Js;s Fw;wk;."

2. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, a decree has been passed as against the petitioner in O.S.No.27 of 2000 on the file of the District Munsif, Karur to the effect that one Neelavathi is the first wife of the petitioner and the same has been set aside in A.S.No.37 of 2004 on the file of the Subordinate Judge, Karur.

3. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, as on date, the said charge cannot stand as against the petitioner and the charge memo has to be quashed as there is no basis for the said charge memo. As far as the merit of charge memo is concerned, the same cannot be gone into under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. It is not the case of the petitioner that the authority who issued the charge memo has no jurisdiction or there is illegality or infirmity in the impugned charge memo. It is not even the case of the petitioner that the authority, who issued the charge memo, is without jurisdiction. Apart from this, according to the learned counsel for the petitioner, as against the order passed in A.S.No.37 of 2004, the first defendant had filed second appeal and the same is pending.

4. In my opinion, as on date the quashing of the charge memo, basing on the order passed in A.S.No.37 of 2004 does not arise. The learned counsel for the petitioner was not brought to the notice of this Court that any other infirmity relating to the procedural aspects or other aspects.

5. Considering the facts and circumstance of the case, to meet the ends of justice, the respondent is directed to complete the enquiry and to pass final orders. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner even as per the interim stay granted in this writ petition by this Court a liberty was also given to the respondent to proceed with the enquiry.

6. Accordingly the respondent is directed to complete the enquiry and to pass final orders within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The petitioner is at liberty to take part in the enquiry and to mark the relevant documents and also to make his objections also.


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.