Madras HC Inquiry Confirms Misconduct Allegations Against Kancheepuram District Judge

2025-09-23 12:00:26

(MENAFN- IANS) Chennai, Sep 23 (IANS) The Madras High Court has confirmed allegations of misconduct against Kancheepuram Principal District and Sessions Judge Pa.U. Chemmal, who earlier this month ordered the judicial custody of a Deputy Superintendent of Police (DSP) over a personal dispute with his former Personal Security Officer (PSO).

Justice N. Sathish Kumar, after examining an inquiry report by Registrar (Vigilance) Jacintha Martin, directed the High Court Registry to place it before the Vigilance Committee, comprising senior judges, for disciplinary proceedings.

He also instructed that the report be forwarded to the Transfer Committee for immediate action, observing that it was "not conducive" to allow the judge to continue in Kancheepuram.

The order came on a petition filed by the Kancheepuram Superintendent of Police, who challenged the district judge's September 8 decision to send the DSP to custody.

Justice Sathish Kumar had swiftly set aside that order on September 9 and ordered a vigilance inquiry into the allegations.

According to Additional Public Prosecutor K.M.D. Muhilan, the Superintendent of Police, DSP, and the judge's former PSO R. Lokeshwaran gave statements to the Registrar (Vigilance).

The inquiry found that the judge had pressured the police to register a case against Lokeshwaran and his father-in-law, a bakery owner, suspecting them of spreading false information about him. The DSP was ordered to be sent to custody, allegedly for not arresting the former aide.

The inquiry also revealed fresh details, including the judge's alleged pressure on a Food Safety Officer to raid the bakery. The FSO appeared before the vigilance authority and confirmed this.

Furthermore, the report mentioned other instances of misconduct, such as coercive action against a local pharmacy that had refused to sell medicines without a valid prescription.

Justice Sathish Kumar, after reviewing the findings, held that the report substantiates the charges of misuse of judicial power. He ordered that appropriate disciplinary measures be considered at the earliest.

MENAFN23092025000231011071ID1110100361

Legal Disclaimer:
MENAFN provides the information “as is” without warranty of any kind. We do not accept any responsibility or liability for the accuracy, content, images, videos, licenses, completeness, legality, or reliability of the information contained in this article. If you have any complaints or copyright issues related to this article, kindly contact the provider above.