{
 "record_id": "CW-2006-0029",
 "status": "current",
 "merged_id": "CWC-1174",
 "alias_merged_ids": [],
 "display_title": "Delhi Police Inspector vs Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Others",
 "display_title_redacted": "Delhi Police Inspector vs Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Others",
 "state": "Delhi",
 "district": null,
 "district_at_time": null,
 "city_town": null,
 "police_station_or_unit": null,
 "court": "Delhi High Court",
 "court_as_verified": "Delhi High Court",
 "bench": null,
 "case_title": "Delhi Police Inspector vs Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Others",
 "case_number": "W.P.(C) No. 3312 of 2006",
 "citation": "LAWS(DLH)-2006-11-33",
 "judges": [
  "Manmohan Sarin",
  "Vipin Sanghi"
 ],
 "judgment_date": "2006-11-15",
 "date_precision": "day",
 "judgment_year": 2006,
 "incident_date": null,
 "incident_year": null,
 "category": "Other",
 "admin_category": "misconduct",
 "admin_subcategory": "other",
 "subcategory": "other",
 "subcategory_display": "other",
 "protest_override_heuristic": false,
 "outcome_type": "disciplinary_upheld",
 "sections": [
  "Delhi Police (Punishment and Appeal) Rules 1980 r.8(d)(ii)"
 ],
 "officers": [
  {
   "name": null,
   "rank": "Inspector",
   "role": "held_liable",
   "unit": "Delhi Police",
   "publish_grade": "unnamed",
   "gate_reasons": [
    "ledger:no_row",
    "key2:no_row"
   ],
   "ledger_role": null,
   "key2": null,
   "key2_agy": null,
   "key2_claude": null,
   "key2_union": null,
   "key2_gemapi": null,
   "key2_openrouter": null,
   "key2_gpt56": null,
   "grok": null,
   "jev_risk": null,
   "jev_p_culpable": null,
   "key2_gpt": null,
   "later_outcome": null,
   "name_public": null,
   "display": "Inspector, Delhi Police"
  },
  {
   "name": null,
   "rank": "Head Constable",
   "role": "named_only",
   "unit": "Delhi Police",
   "publish_grade": "unnamed",
   "gate_reasons": [
    "ledger:no_row",
    "key2:no_row"
   ],
   "ledger_role": null,
   "key2": null,
   "key2_agy": null,
   "key2_claude": null,
   "key2_union": null,
   "key2_gemapi": null,
   "key2_openrouter": null,
   "key2_gpt56": null,
   "grok": null,
   "jev_risk": null,
   "jev_p_culpable": null,
   "key2_gpt": null,
   "later_outcome": null,
   "name_public": null,
   "display": "Head Constable, Delhi Police"
  },
  {
   "name": null,
   "rank": "Constable",
   "role": "named_only",
   "unit": "Delhi Police",
   "publish_grade": "unnamed",
   "gate_reasons": [
    "ledger:no_row",
    "key2:no_row"
   ],
   "ledger_role": null,
   "key2": null,
   "key2_agy": null,
   "key2_claude": null,
   "key2_union": null,
   "key2_gemapi": null,
   "key2_openrouter": null,
   "key2_gpt56": null,
   "grok": null,
   "jev_risk": null,
   "jev_p_culpable": null,
   "key2_gpt": null,
   "later_outcome": null,
   "name_public": null,
   "display": "Constable, Delhi Police"
  }
 ],
 "officer_count": 3,
 "victims": [
  {
   "name": null,
   "age": null,
   "gender": "male",
   "descriptor": "Delhi man"
  }
 ],
 "victims_redacted": null,
 "anonymised": false,
 "victim_count": 1,
 "sentence_type": null,
 "sentence_max_years": null,
 "compensation_inr": null,
 "force": "state_police",
 "primary_source_url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/457839/",
 "secondary_sources": [
  "https://www.courtkutchehry.com/judgements/902156/ram-janam-singh-vs-govt-of-nct-of-delhi-and-others/"
 ],
 "summary": "The judgment of the Delhi High Court records the following account. Inspector faced departmental proceedings on the charge that two constables under him, acting on his sister-in-law's complaint, dispossessed shopkeeper [name withheld] of his shop by removing his goods and putting her lock on it, without any DD entry or registered case. The enquiry held the misconduct proved and the disciplinary authority on 21.3.2000 imposed forfeiture of two years approved service with pay reduction (the same order also punished Head Constable and Constable [name withheld]); his appeal, OA and restoration pleas all failed. The Court held the petitioner could not disown his subordinates' acts and sustained the misconduct finding and forfeiture. It struck only the direction postponing future increments as contrary to Rule 8(d)(ii) of the Delhi Police (Punishment and Appeal) Rules, 1980, and otherwise dismissed the writ.",
 "summary_verified": "Inspector faced departmental proceedings on the charge that two constables under him, acting on his sister-in-law's complaint, dispossessed shopkeeper [name withheld] of his shop by removing his goods and putting her lock on it, without any DD entry or registered case. The enquiry held the misconduct proved and the disciplinary authority on 21.3.2000 imposed forfeiture of two years approved service with pay reduction (the same order also punished Head Constable and Constable [name withheld]); his appeal, OA and restoration pleas all failed. The Court held the petitioner could not disown his subordinates' acts and sustained the misconduct finding and forfeiture. It struck only the direction postponing future increments as contrary to Rule 8(d)(ii) of the Delhi Police (Punishment and Appeal) Rules, 1980, and otherwise dismissed the writ.",
 "court_quote": "we are unable to agree with the petitioner that there was no misconduct committed by the petitioner and he could not be held liable for the acts of his subordinates.",
 "court_quote_para": "6",
 "confidence": "high",
 "verdict": "accept",
 "verdict_note": "Misconduct finding sustained; forfeiture of 2 yrs approved service upheld, increment bar struck.",
 "verification_status": "V2",
 "verification_badge": "V2 · Externally reported",
 "tier_badge": "Externally reported",
 "tier": "Tier A — Externally reported or officially recorded",
 "tier_history": [
  "Tier A — Externally reported or officially recorded"
 ],
 "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"
  }
 ],
 "institutional_response": [
  {
   "date": "2006-11-15",
   "action_type": "Order issued",
   "status": "Concluded",
   "authority": "Delhi High Court",
   "independence": "External",
   "legal_effect": "Binding",
   "description": "The Delhi High Court upheld service punishment imposed on police personnel.",
   "disposition": "Disciplinary action · Procedural only",
   "source": "LAWS(DLH)-2006-11-33",
   "recheck": "Not yet re-checked."
  }
 ],
 "later_proceedings": [],
 "final_outcome_url": null,
 "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": [
    "sections"
   ]
  }
 ],
 "followup_status": "checked",
 "last_checked": "2026-09-19",
 "link_checked_per_url": [
  {
   "url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/457839/",
   "link_checked": null
  },
  {
   "url": "https://www.courtkutchehry.com/judgements/902156/ram-janam-singh-vs-govt-of-nct-of-delhi-and-others/",
   "link_checked": null
  }
 ],
 "source_assessment": {
  "established": null,
  "basis": null
 },
 "v3_basis": null,
 "publication_basis": null,
 "reviews": [],
 "retracted": {
  "is_retracted": false
 },
 "fidelity_checked": true,
 "verified_by": [
  "chunk-107"
 ],
 "merged_case_id": "GAP3-39-005",
 "officers_named_public": 0,
 "record_flag": null,
 "service": "police",
 "watch": "babuwatch"
}