The Madurai bench dismissed the Government's writ appeal challenging a single judge's order that quashed punishment delaying increment for a constable accused of allowing an accused to escape while in a patrolling vehicle.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
W.A.(MD).No.2068 of 2024
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 24.10.2024
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUBRAMANIAN and THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE L.VICTORIA GOWRI
W.A.(MD).No.2068 of 2024 and
C.M.P.(MD)No.14739 of 2024
-vs-
N.Jeyaram ... Respondent
PRAYER: Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent Act, against the order passed by this Court in W.P.(MD)No.14520 of 2018, dated 28.10.2022.
For Appellants : Mr.S.R.A.Ramachandran Additional Government Pleader
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ______________
_____________ Page 1 of 5_
W.A.(MD).No.2068 of 2024
For Respondent : Mr.G.Karthick For M/s.Lajapathi Roy Associates
JUDGMENT
[Judgment of the Court was made by R.SUBRAMANIAN, J.]
Mr.G.Karthick, learned counsel for M/s.Lajapathi Roy Associates takes notice for the respondent.
2.The Appeal is by the Government. The Writ Court allowed the Writ Petition, quashing the punishment imposed on the respondent, who is a Head Constable at the relevant point of time. The charge against the respondent was that he allowed one accused by name, Abbas s/o, Haneefa, to escape from police custody. Though he was entrusted to him at Colachel Police Station by the Inspector of Police on 08.10.2022. The charge was held to be proved and the respondent was slapped with the punishment of postponement of increment by one year, which shall operate to postpone his future increments. Since the appellate authority rejected the appeal and the mercy petition was also rejected, the respondent approached the Government and the Government declined to interfere, leading to the filing of the Writ Petition. The Writ Court found that the charge against the respondent has not been established at all. It is stated that a lorry carrying sand was intercepted by the Highway patrol party and this respondent was a part of the patrol party. The driver of the lorry alighted from the lorry and
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ______________
Page 2 of 5
W.A.(MD).No.2068 of 2024
when he was asked about the sand being carried, he had informed the police party that the owner of the lorry is inside the lorry and they procured the owner and when they were preparing the papers, the Driver escaped. The learned Single Judge has rightly found that if at all anyone is responsible, entire patrol party must be held responsible. The entire liability cannot be fastened on the respondent alone. The learned Single Judge has also found that there is no question of the Driver escaping from the police custody, as he had not been arrested as admitted by the Inspector of Police during the disciplinary proceedings.
3.Mr.S.R.A.Ramachandran, learned Additional Government Pleader would contend that the first respondent being a part of the patrol party would be liable for the escape of the accused person.
4.Factually, the Writ Court found that there was no arrest and as admitted by the Inspector during the domestic enquiry, the accused person had escaped, when papers were being prepared. Therefore, the respondent alone cannot be blamed for the escape. When the factual position is admitted, we are unable to fault the Writ Court for having come to the conclusion that the punishment imposed on the respondent alone cannot be sustained.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis _____________ Page 3 of 5_
W.A.(MD).No.2068 of 2024
5.Hence, the Writ Appeals fails and it is accordingly, dismissed. No
Costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
[R.S.M., J.] [L.V.G., J.] 24.10.2024
NCC :Yes/No Index :Yes/No Internet: Yes Mrn
To
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis _____________ Page 4 of 5_
W.A.(MD).No.2068 of 2024
R.SUBRAMANIAN, J. and L.VICTORIA GOWRI, J.
Mrn
W.A.(MD).No.2068 of 2024
24.10.2024
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis _____________ Page 5 of 5_
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the writ appeal challenging the quashing of punishment imposed on a police constable for alleged escape of an accused from custody should be allowed.
Whether the respondent alone is liable for the escape when the patrol party was collectively responsible and no arrest had been made.
Government of Tamil Nadu
Commissioner of Police, Tirunelveli City
Superintendent of Police, Kanyakumari District
N.Jeyaram
R.Subramanian
L.Victoria Gowri
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
