Directions of Madras High Court
The Madras High Court has directed the Director General of Police of Tamil Nadu to issue a circular asking police personnel to appear before courts wearing proper uniform and maintaining “absolute integrity, discipline and devotion to duty”, after a police officer appeared drunk while being produced as a prosecution witness.
Judgment overview
In its July 14 ruling, a division bench of Justices SM Subramaniam and N Senthilkumar also directed that if any police personnel, medical officer or any other government official appears before the court in a disorderly manner, the judicial officer presiding over the court must report such conduct to the relevant authority so that disciplinary proceedings can be initiated.
“Such a careless attitude of coming to court in a drunken state must be viewed seriously. The administrative action is entirely based on preponderance of probability and his action has completely deteriorated the image of the police force in the courtroom and must be curbed, otherwise the misconduct committed by the defendant will destroy the entire police force,” the court said.
Background of the case
These directions came while deciding the appeal filed by the Tamil Nadu government against the order of a single judge quashing the disciplinary action against the police constable in Arumugam.
Arumugam had appealed the sentence imposed on him for his conduct while appearing as an official witness before a judicial magistrate.
In 2014, while serving as a special assistant inspector of police, Arumugam appeared as a prosecution witness in a criminal case he investigated. During his testimony, the judge noted “signs of intoxication,” including “the smell of alcohol, incoherent speech, and screaming,” and ordered that he be subjected to a medical examination.
The doctor recorded the smell of alcohol on his breath and issued him a “drunkenness certificate.” Following departmental action, Arumugam was initially granted compulsory retirement. The penalty was later amended, allowing him to resume work, but with annual increases suspended for three years.
Legal procedures
He then went to the Supreme Court, and in 2020, a single judge overturned the disciplinary measures and penalty. The state appealed this order before the Division Bench.
After allowing the state’s appeal, the bench set aside the order of the single judge and held that Arumugam’s conduct amounted to serious misconduct that undermined the dignity of the court and the image of the police force.
The court noted that the administration’s procedures were subject to the principle of preponderance of probabilities and that misconduct of official witnesses within the courtroom could not be overlooked.
The court further held that judicial officers are obliged to report any indiscipline, misconduct or unusual behavior by official witnesses to the competent authority for appropriate disciplinary action.
Expanding on its directives, the court said that all official witnesses, especially police personnel, are required to maintain decorum and discipline while testifying before courts and must provide truthful evidence. “Misconduct committed within the courtroom cannot be tolerated, under any circumstances,” the Supreme Court said.
Implementing directives
The court directed the DGP to issue the circular within four weeks. It also instructed the Registry of the Madras High Court to circulate the directions to all courts in Tamil Nadu to ensure uniform compliance with the norms laid down in the judgement.
