‘Supplied ganja to prisoners’: Madras High Court backs dismissal of central jail warden

Dismissed from service

According to the case records, a surprise inspection was conducted in the central prison and 10 grams of ganja was seized from a prisoner. The prisoner said that he received the ganja from the petitioner while he was employed on duty at the Bakery Unit in the prison.

During a preliminary inquiry, the petitioner admitted that he had visited the house of a convict when the latter was on escort parole. He also admitted to consuming alcohol at the house and receiving Rs 5,000 from a friend of the convict.

Justice B Pugalendhi noted that even maintaining familiarity with the prisoners is prohibited under the Tamil Nadu Prison Rules.

After an inquiry, the petitioner was suspended for violation of the Tamil Nadu Prison Rules. After the departmental inquiry found the charges proved, the prison superintendent dismissed him from service. The Deputy Inspector General of Prisons, Madurai Range, rejected his appeal.

The senior counsel appearing for the petitioner argued that the prisoner whose statement formed the basis of the allegation that the petitioner had supplied ganja was not examined during the departmental inquiry. The petitioner also contended that no CCTV footage was produced to establish the alleged supply.

The petitioner also submitted that he was on leave and not present in the prison on the day of the alleged incident.

Opposing the plea, the government advocate argued that the prison records, including the bakery duty register and the entry and exit register, established his presence at the prison.

Punishment proportionate: Court

The high court noted that even maintaining familiarity with the prisoners or having correspondence with friends of such prisoners is prohibited under the Tamil Nadu Prison Rules.

It observed that as per the Prison Rules, every prison officer has a duty to prevent the introduction and handing over of prohibited articles to prisoners. The petitioner, who has a duty to prevent the introduction of contraband, himself supplied ganja to the prisoners, the judge found. The court thus held that the punishment cannot be said to be disproportionate.

“Considering the limited scope of judicial review in departmental proceedings, available materials and the serious nature of charges as discussed supra, this court is not inclined to interfere with the order of punishment imposed on the petitioner. Accordingly this writ petition is dismissed,” the order read.