LexStreak
Read free →
Madras High Court· 08 September 2026

Is interference by taking a lenient view on misplaced sympathy in matters of discipline in a uniformed force desirable?

The Director General of Police v. G. Aravindhan
WA.513/2024 · 2026:MHC:3808 · W.A.NO.513 OF 2024
Coram: Justice S.M.Subramaniam · Justice Krishnaswamy Govindarajan
🔖 Save this judgment🔔 Follow r.3(b) Tamil Nadu Police Subordi…📬 Get today's judgments
View the original judgment PDFFree to read. To download it — or the LexStreak typeset copy with the headnote and Points of Law — create an account; downloads are part of the Pro plan.
Answer

Interference by taking a lenient view on misplaced sympathy in matters of discipline in a uniformed force is not desirable.

No. Interference by taking a lenient view on misplaced sympathy in matters of discipline in a uniformed force is not desirable. It would fall beyond the realm of the powers of judicial review, result in a bad precedent and cause demoralization amongst the personnel of the Uniformed Forces.

Headnote

Tamil Nadu Police Subordinate Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1955 — r.3(b) — Letters Patent — Clause 15 — Desertion — Removal from service — Scope of judicial review — Tamil Nadu Police Subordinate Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1955 — r.3(b) — Uniformed force — Lenient view undesirable — Held: Interference by taking a lenient view on misplaced sympathy in matters of discipline in a uniformed force is not desirable and falls beyond the realm of judicial review. (¶10) Tamil Nadu Police Subordinate Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1955 — r.3(b) — Habitual desertion — Removal justified — Held further: Habitual desertion within a short span of service excludes any lenient view, since the morale and discipline of the force would otherwise be paralyzed. (¶9, 11) Tamil Nadu Police Subordinate Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1955 — Circular — First time deserter only — Held further: A circular permitting reconsideration of a first time deserter does not apply where the deserter did not report within sixty days. Writ appeal allowed. (¶2, 11)

Headnote

You've used your free headnotes this month

The answer above and the Court's own paragraphs stay free. LexStreak's full headnote on this judgment needs an account — a free one opens it again.

Create my free account
In the Court's own words
Paragraph 10The Courts taking a lenient view in matters relating to discipline amongst police personnel serving in Uniformed Force is not desirable. It would fall beyond the realm of the powers of the judicial review. In the event of taking any such lenient view, it will result in a bad precedent. It is mandated on the Police Officials to ensure that utmost discipline and integrity are being maintained in Uniformed Services for better performances of the public duties. Therefore, interference by taking a lenient view on misplaced sympathy would cause demoralization amongst the personnel of the Uniformed Forces. In fact, such a lenient view had been adopted in cases where the reasons are genuine and convincible before the Competent Authority.
Acts & Sections
r.3(b) Tamil Nadu Police Subordinate Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1955

One judgment a day. That's the whole habit.

Read the full text of The Director General of Police v. G. Aravindhan — and get the Madras High Court's output as a five-minute daily read, with plain-language headnotes and the questions each judgment settles.

Create my free account

Free forever plan · 30 seconds · data stays in India

Open the full judgment →

Also decided in this judgment
Does habitual desertion within a short span of service exclude any lenient view on the punishment of removal from service?Does a circular permitting reconsideration of a first time deserter apply where the deserter did not report within sixty days?
Plain-language answer prepared by the LexStreak Editorial Desk — verify against the judgment. Source: Madras High Court. Corrections