Magistrate order providing relief to dismissed constable set aside

A division bench comprising Justice Huluvadi G Ramesh and Justice V Parthiban, said “The gravity of the offence must necessarily be measured with the nature of offence. The respondent was a member of a disciplined force holding the rank of police constable. We entirely agree with the findings of the authorities that the charge is serious in nature, being committed by a member of a disciplined force, who deserved stringent punishment.” 

The bench held that “To instill the confidence of the public in the establishment, the only appropriate punishment in such cases is dismissal from service, which has been correctly awarded. In such circumstances, we are of the view that a lenient view, if taken, would amount to clear favouritism to him and send a wrong signal to other members of the department where maintaining ‘absolute integrity’ is the main moto that whatever wrong they do, could be let off.” 

Ivarkula Raja, a Gr.II police constable in Washermenpet station was placed under suspension in 2004, on the charge that he left the headquarters without prior permission and on the same day along with three others robbed the house of one Chandralingam. 

Thereafter, based on the findings of a departmental inquiry that he had a hand in the robbery, was removed from service on April 24, 2006. Challenging the dismissal, Ivarkula Raja moved the judicial magistrate court seeking to quash the dismissal as the criminal case against him had ended in an acquittal. The judge who heard the case set aside the dismissal. 

The HC bench which set aside the relief given by the magistrate, however modified the punishment of dismissal into compulsory retirement, for the sake of his family.