The Director General Of Police v. A.Veluchamy,
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Reserved on : 02.01.2026 Delivered on : 09.01.2026
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN AND THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE R.KALAIMATHI and C.M.P.(MD) No.1251 of 2021 1.The Director General of Police, O/o. the Director General of Police, No.1, Dr.Radhakrishnan Salai, Mylapore, Chennai - 4.
2.The Deputy Inspector General of Police, O/o. the Deputy Inspector General of Police, Dindigul Rang I/c Madurai Range, Dindigul.
3.The Superintendent of Police, O/o. the Superintendent of Police,
4. The Inspector of Police, Thirumangalam Town Police Station, Madurai.
... Appellants/Respondents Vs.
1/6
A.Veluchamy ... Respondent/Petitioner PRAYER: Writ Appeal is filed under Clause 15 of Letter Patent, against the Order dated 30.01.2020 made in W.P.(MD) No.22870 of 2015 by this Court.
For Appellants : Mr.A.Baskaran Additional Government Pleader For Respondent : Mr. I.Pinaygash
JUDGMENT
(Judgment of the Court was made by R.Kalaimathi J.) This Writ Appeal is preferred by the respondents against the Order dated 30.01.2020 made in W.P.(MD) No.22870 of 2015.
2. The petitioner was initially appointed as Grade-II Police Constable and on 28.09.1999, he was promoted as Grade-I Constable and thereafter, on 01.06.2003, he was promoted as Head Constable. He was serving in the Police Department for the past 27 years without any blemish. While so, on 18.12.2010, a case was registered in Crime No. 686 of 2010 for the offence punishable under Section 465 IPC, alleging that the signature of one Sub Inspector of Police Tmt.Antony Jegatha was forged on the charge sheet concerned in Crime No.39 of 2010 of 2/6
Thirumangalam Town Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 324 and 506(ii) IPC. As a criminal case was registered upon the writ petitioner, he was suspended from service on the next day i.e., on 19.12.2010 by the Superintendent of Police of
3. Further, relevant Report of the Inspector of Police, Thirumangalam Town Police Station, dated 18.12.2010 given in this regard, reads that there are some slight differences in the signatures: after getting Opinion from the hand-writing expert, enquiry would be conducted. The Enquiry Officer, after conducting the enquiry, submitted report to the effect that there is nothing to prove that the petitioner had pecuniary benefits: neither the section of law nor the witnesses names in the list of witnesses were altered.
4. Thereafter, on 01.11.2011, order of suspension which was passed against the writ petitioner was revoked. Final orders were passed by the third respondent on 17.10.2012 in Na.Ka.No.F1/Tha.Pa. 76/2011 imposing punishment that "postponement of next increment for one year which shall not operate to postpone his future increments for 3/6
one year". His appeal as well as mercy petition were dismissed by the concerned Authorities. It is also put forth by the learned counsel for the appellants that the criminal case in Crime No.686 of 2010, which was registered against the petitioner, was closed as 'further action dropped' in R.C.S.No.315/2014.
5. The Enquiry Report reads that there are some slight differences in the signatures. During enquiry, witnesses examined on the prosecution side have not stated anything against the delinquent. It is also relevant to note that in the report of the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Thirumangalam, it has been observed that there is nothing to prove that the petitioner had enjoyed any pecuniary benefits. It is also crucial to note that the case registered against the writ petitioner was not pursued and it was closed as further action was dropped. In the report of Deputy Superintendent of Police, Thirumangalam, nothing is stated against the writ petitioner. Based on the aforestated discussions, we are of the considered view that the impugned order does not suffer from any infirmity or perversity.
6. In such circumstances, we find no merits in the Writ Appeal. 4/6
Accordingly, this Writ Appeal stands dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
[G.R.S., J.] [R.K.M., J.] 09.01.2026 Index : Yes/No Internet : Yes/No NCC : Yes/No apd To 1.The Director General of Police, O/o. the Director General of Police, No.1, Dr.Radhakrishnan Salai, Mylapore, Chennai - 4.
2.The Deputy Inspector General of Police, O/o. the Deputy Inspector General of Police, Dindigul Rang I/c Madurai Range, Dindigul.
3.The Superintendent of Police, O/o. the Superintendent of Police,
4. The Inspector of Police, Thirumangalam Town Police Station, Madurai.
5/6
G.R.SWAMINATHAN,J.
AND R.KALAIMATHI, J.
apd and C.M.P.(MD) No.1251 of 2021 09.01.2026 6/6