1 Oct 2007
Order issued
ConcludedThe Madras High Court upheld service punishment imposed on police personnel.
Disciplinary action · Procedural only.
Source: W.P.(MD) No. 4024 of 2005
Not yet re-checked.
CW-2007-0029Madurai, Tamil NaduJudgment 1 October 2007
Madurai Police Head Constable vs The Director General of Police and Others
The judgment of the Madras High Court records the following account. On 26 March 2004, Head Constable, on patrol in Vehicle No.1 of the Madurai City Control Room, threatened the supervisor and salesmen of TASMAC Shop No.5135 and forced Rs.100 from them on the pretext the shop was open past licence hours. The Assistant Commissioner's Rule 3(b) enquiry held the charge proved and the Commissioner of Police, Madurai City, removed him from service on 19 August 2004; his appeal and revision were rejected. The Madurai Bench held the enquiry procedure suffered no infirmity and its conclusion was not perverse, so the bribery finding stood. The Court agreed the misconduct attracted only a major penalty but held removal disproportionate to 29 years of unblemished service, modifying it to compulsory retirement with terminal benefits and directing pension papers within eight weeks. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.
Externally reportedV2
What this record means
This page documents a court-adjudicated case from the judgment and cited sources below. Findings are attributed to the court; this record does not add findings of its own.
How verification works →Detailed record
Report card
By judgment dated 1 October 2007 in W.P.(MD) No. 4024 of 2005, the Madras High Court (Coram: K. Chandru, J.) upheld the disciplinary action taken against the Head Constable, Patrol Vehicle No.1, Madurai City Control Room.
- Register number
- TN 57 CW 0003
- Case reference
- W.P.(MD) No. 4024 of 2005
- Court and date
- Madras High Court (Coram: K. Chandru, J.), 1 October 2007
- Officer(s) at the material time
- Head Constable, Patrol Vehicle No.1, Madurai City Control Room
- Present service status
- Recorded in the cited sources as compulsorily retired.
- Provisions invoked
- Rule 3(b) of the Tamil Nadu Police State and Subordinate Service Rules
- Finding of the Court (extract)
- “This Court is of the view that while the petitioner's misconduct cannot be condoned and he must be imposed only with major penalty, but, however, considering the penalty now imposed, it is clear that it will result in serious consequences …” (at para 8)
- Verdict, sentence and quantum
- Disciplinary action upheld. Sentence: dismissal.
- Present status of the proceedings
- No further proceedings are recorded in the cited sources; the judgment is the concluded position shown.
Compiled from the judgment and the cited sources. Findings are those of the court; this card adds none of its own.
Current position
The Madras High Court judgment dated 1 October 2007 is the concluded position shown in the cited sources.
Evidence position
Recorded allegations
OtherPrimary
Material fact supported
Reliable material supports a specifically documented fact relevant to that allegation, not necessarily the full allegation, causation, intent, unlawfulness, or responsibility.
Official finding: supports allegation.
Attributed to the court
What the court found
Holding not recorded separately.
“This Court is of the view that while the petitioner's misconduct cannot be condoned and he must be imposed only with major penalty, but, however, considering the penalty now imposed, it is clear that it will result in serious consequences …” (para 8)
Separate from verification
Institutional response
Continuing record
Follow-up history
19 Sep 2026
(Round-8 full re-verification: published record re-checked against the judgment text (outcome, officers, quote, key facts) plus methodology-compliance pass; skills-guided adversarial re-verification of the published record against the judgment text (reverify/t1-*/adversarial-8.jsonl))
Corrections (0): No corrections recorded.
Review: Solo Staff combined review (one combined attestation) — not yet recorded.