# The Director General of Police and Others vs Thirukoilur Police Special Sub-Inspector of Police (Head Constable at relevant time)

HTML version: [https://datalibertarian.in/babuwatch/incident/CW-2026-0052](https://datalibertarian.in/babuwatch/incident/CW-2026-0052)

## Report card

By judgment dated 14 July 2026 in W.A. No.1850 of 2026, the Madras High Court (Coram: S.M. Subramaniam, N. Senthilkumar, JJ.) upheld the disciplinary action taken against the Special Sub-Inspector of Police (Head Constable at relevant time), Arakandanallur Police Station.

- Register number: TN 15 CW 0005
- Case reference: W.A. No.1850 of 2026 / 2026:MHC:2846
- Court and date: Madras High Court (Coram: S.M. Subramaniam, N. Senthilkumar, JJ.), 14 July 2026
- Officer(s) at the material time: Special Sub-Inspector of Police (Head Constable at relevant time), Arakandanallur Police Station
- Present service status: Recorded in the cited sources as compulsorily retired.
- Provisions invoked: Rule 3(b) of the TN Police Subordinate Services (D&A) Rules, 1955
- Finding of the Court (extract): “Witnesses including the police officials, while deposing before the Courts, in connection with the criminal cases or any other case, are expected to maintain decorum and discipline and depose the statement in a truthful manner. This being the settled legal …” (at para 11)
- Verdict, sentence and quantum: Disciplinary action upheld.
- Present status of the proceedings: The judgment is recent and may be subject to appeal; the pendency of an appeal is not a finding.
- Source orders: [Judgment / order (primary source)](https://www.verdictum.in/pdf_upload/2026/07/18/2026mhc2846-verdictum-1781097.pdf); [Permanent link to this record](https://datalibertarian.in/babuwatch/incident/CW-2026-0052)

**Record:** CW-2026-0052 (compiler id CWC-0859); case GAP2-40-003
**Title:** The Director General of Police and Others vs Thirukoilur Police Special Sub-Inspector of Police (Head Constable at relevant time)
**Court:** Madras High Court; judges: S.M. Subramaniam; N. Senthilkumar
**Case number / citation:** W.A. No.1850 of 2026 / 2026:MHC:2846
**Judgment:** 2026-07-14 (2026, day precision)
**Incident date:** 2014-11-25 (2014)
**Place:** Kallakurichi, Tamil Nadu (district at time: Villupuram); city town: Thirukoilur; police station or unit: Arakandanallur Police Station; force: state_police
**Category:** Other misconduct
**Sub-category:** other
**Outcome:** Disciplinary action upheld (disciplinary_upheld)
**Sections:** TN Police Subordinate Services (D&A) Rules 1955 Rule 3(b)
**Officers (gated display forms):** Special Sub-Inspector of Police (Head Constable at relevant time), Arakandanallur Police Station (1 in record)
**Victims:** Not stated (0 in record)
**Sentence / compensation:** None ordered

The judgment of the Madras High Court records the following account. Special Sub-Inspector appeared drunk to depose before the Judicial Magistrate, Thirukoilur, on 25 November 2014; he was compulsorily retired, modified on appeal to postponement of increment for three years with cumulative effect. The Writ Court had quashed the penalty for want of blood and urine tests, but the Division Bench held that departmental proof needs only preponderance of probabilities and that the Drunkenness Certificate with the Magistrate contemporaneous observation sufficed. The court allowed the State appeal, restoring the penalty, and directed the DGP to issue a decorum circular for police deposing in courts.

> Witnesses including the police officials, while deposing before the Courts, in connection with the criminal cases or any other case, are expected to maintain decorum and discipline and depose the statement in a truthful manner. This being the settled legal position, any misconduct committed inside a Court Hall cannot, under any circumstances, be tolerated.

**Sources (2):** [verdictum.in](https://www.verdictum.in/pdf_upload/2026/07/18/2026mhc2846-verdictum-1781097.pdf); [verdictum.in](https://www.verdictum.in/madras-high-court/2026-mhc-2846-director-general-of-police-v-v-arumuram-1618011)
**Verification:** V2 · Externally reported
**Review:** Solo Staff combined review (one combined attestation) — not yet recorded
**admin category:** misconduct
**admin subcategory:** other
**allegations:** {'category': 'Other', 'primary': True, 'position': 'Material fact supported', 'position_explainer': 'Reliable material supports a specifically documented fact relevant to that allegation, not necessarily the full allegation, causation, intent, unlawfulness, or responsibility.', 'official_finding_relation': 'supports allegation'}
**anonymised:** False
**court quote para:** 11
**display title redacted:** The Director General of Police and Others vs Thirukoilur Police Special Sub-Inspector of Police (Head Constable at relevant time)
**followup history:** {'date': '2026-09-19', 'scope': 'Round-8 full re-verification: published record re-checked against the judgment text (outcome, officers, quote, key facts) plus methodology-compliance pass', 'method': 'skills-guided adversarial re-verification of the published record against the judgment text (reverify/t1-*/adversarial-8.jsonl)', 'result': 'holds', 'corrections_applied': \[\]}
**followup status:** checked
**institutional response:** {'date': '2026-07-14', 'action_type': 'Order issued', 'status': 'Concluded', 'authority': 'Madras High Court', 'independence': 'External', 'legal_effect': 'Binding', 'description': 'The Madras High Court upheld service punishment imposed on police personnel.', 'disposition': 'Disciplinary action · Procedural only', 'source': '2026:MHC:2846', 'recheck': 'Not yet re-checked.'}
**last checked:** 2026-09-19
**link checked per url:** {'url': 'https://www.verdictum.in/pdf_upload/2026/07/18/2026mhc2846-verdictum-1781097.pdf', 'link_checked': None}; {'url': 'https://www.verdictum.in/madras-high-court/2026-mhc-2846-director-general-of-police-v-v-arumuram-1618011', 'link_checked': None}
**retracted:** {"is_retracted": false}
**service:** police
**source assessment:** {"established": null, "basis": null}
**status:** current
**subcategory display:** other
**tier:** Tier A — Externally reported or officially recorded
**tier badge:** Externally reported
**tier history:** Tier A — Externally reported or officially recorded
**verdict:** accept
**verdict note:** HC allowed State appeal, restored increment-cut penalty for drunkenness inside court hall.
**verification badge:** V2 · Externally reported
**verification status:** V2
**watch:** babuwatch

Status: Disciplinary action upheld.

[Open CW-2026-0052](https://datalibertarian.in/babuwatch/incident/CW-2026-0052)