{ "record_id": "CW-2009-0020", "status": "current", "merged_id": "CWC-1085", "alias_merged_ids": [], "display_title": "Rajasthan Woman vs State of Rajasthan & Ors.", "display_title_redacted": "Rajasthan Woman vs State of Rajasthan & Ors.", "state": "Rajasthan", "district": null, "district_at_time": null, "city_town": null, "police_station_or_unit": null, "court": "Rajasthan High Court", "court_as_verified": "Rajasthan High Court", "bench": "Jodhpur", "case_title": "Rajasthan Woman vs State of Rajasthan & Ors.", "case_number": "S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 416/2009", "citation": null, "judges": [ "H.R. Panwar" ], "judgment_date": "2009-02-17", "date_precision": "day", "judgment_year": 2009, "incident_date": null, "incident_year": null, "category": "Other", "admin_category": "misconduct", "admin_subcategory": "dereliction_evidence_tampering", "subcategory": "dereliction_evidence_tampering", "subcategory_display": "dereliction evidence tampering", "protest_override_heuristic": false, "outcome_type": "disciplinary_upheld", "sections": [ "Rajasthan CCA Rules 1958 Rule 16", "Constitution Art. 226" ], "officers": [ { "name": null, "rank": "Constable", "role": "held_liable", "unit": "Rajasthan 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, Rajasthan Police" } ], "officer_count": 1, "victims": [], "victims_redacted": null, "anonymised": false, "victim_count": 0, "sentence_type": "dismissal", "sentence_max_years": null, "compensation_inr": null, "force": "state_police", "primary_source_url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/29647231/", "secondary_sources": [], "summary": "The judgment of the Rajasthan High Court records the following account. The widow of police Constable, appointed in February 1976, sought quashing of his removal from service for habitual wilful absence and release of retiral benefits and family pension. The inquiry officer had found the absence charges proved, the disciplinary authority removed him in March 1993 and again in January 1996 after an appellate remand, and her review before the Governor filed in July 2007 was dismissed as time-barred. The court found he was a habitual absentee who repeatedly absented without leave, held the prescribed inquiry procedure was followed and a writ court cannot set aside a well-reasoned disciplinary order on sympathy, and held the punishment was not disproportionate. It dismissed the writ petition, leaving the removal and denial of retiral benefits intact. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.", "summary_verified": "The widow of police Constable, appointed in February 1976, sought quashing of his removal from service for habitual wilful absence and release of retiral benefits and family pension. The inquiry officer had found the absence charges proved, the disciplinary authority removed him in March 1993 and again in January 1996 after an appellate remand, and her review before the Governor filed in July 2007 was dismissed as time-barred. The court found he was a habitual absentee who repeatedly absented without leave, held the prescribed inquiry procedure was followed and a writ court cannot set aside a well-reasoned disciplinary order on sympathy, and held the punishment was not disproportionate. It dismissed the writ petition, leaving the removal and denial of retiral benefits intact.", "court_quote": "In the instant case, it is evident from the inquiry report that the husband of the petitioner being police constable, an employee of the respondent Police Department in Uniform repeatedly remained absent without leave voluntarily.", "court_quote_para": "n/a", "confidence": "high", "verdict": "accept", "verdict_note": "Judgment text verified; deceased constable's removal for habitual absence upheld; widow's writ dismissed.", "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": "2009-02-17", "action_type": "Order issued", "status": "Concluded", "authority": "Rajasthan High Court", "independence": "External", "legal_effect": "Binding", "description": "The Rajasthan High Court upheld service punishment imposed on police personnel.", "disposition": "Disciplinary action · Procedural only", "source": "S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 416/2009", "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": [] } ], "followup_status": "checked", "last_checked": "2026-09-19", "link_checked_per_url": [ { "url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/29647231/", "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-95" ], "merged_case_id": "GAP3-121-003", "officers_named_public": 0, "record_flag": null, "service": "police", "watch": "babuwatch" }