{
 "record_id": "CW-2013-0033",
 "status": "current",
 "merged_id": "CWC-1253",
 "alias_merged_ids": [],
 "display_title": "Jagdalpur Police Constable (No. 636) vs State of M.P. and Others",
 "display_title_redacted": "Jagdalpur Police Constable (No. 636) vs State of M.P. and Others",
 "state": "Chhattisgarh",
 "district": "Bastar",
 "district_at_time": null,
 "city_town": "Jagdalpur",
 "police_station_or_unit": "30th Battalion, Special Armed Force, Jagdalpur",
 "court": "Chhattisgarh High Court",
 "court_as_verified": "Chhattisgarh High Court",
 "bench": null,
 "case_title": "Jagdalpur Police Constable (No. 636) vs State of M.P. and Others",
 "case_number": "Writ Petition No. (S) 1082 of 2005",
 "citation": "(2014) LabIC 693; (2013) 09 CHH CK 0017",
 "judges": [
  "Pritinker Diwaker"
 ],
 "judgment_date": "2013-09-16",
 "date_precision": "day",
 "judgment_year": 2013,
 "incident_date": "1993-10-22",
 "incident_year": 1993,
 "category": "Other",
 "admin_category": "misconduct",
 "admin_subcategory": "other",
 "subcategory": "other",
 "subcategory_display": "other",
 "protest_override_heuristic": false,
 "outcome_type": "disciplinary_upheld",
 "sections": [
  "IPC 302/34 (tried; acquitted 30-11-1994)",
  "Police Regulations Regulation 226"
 ],
 "officers": [
  {
   "name": null,
   "rank": "Constable (No. 636)",
   "unit": "30th Battalion, SAF, Jagdalpur",
   "role": "held_liable",
   "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 (No. 636), 30th Battalion, SAF, Jagdalpur"
  }
 ],
 "officer_count": 1,
 "victims": [
  {
   "name": null,
   "age": null,
   "gender": "male",
   "descriptor": "Jagdalpur man"
  }
 ],
 "victims_redacted": null,
 "anonymised": false,
 "victim_count": 1,
 "sentence_type": "dismissal",
 "sentence_max_years": null,
 "compensation_inr": null,
 "force": "state_police",
 "primary_source_url": "https://www.courtkutchehry.com/judgements/896474/photkooram-vs-state-of-mp-and-others/",
 "secondary_sources": [
  "(2014) LabIC 693"
 ],
 "summary": "The judgment of the Chhattisgarh High Court records the following account. SAF Constable (No. 636, 30th Battalion, Jagdalpur) was suspended after he allegedly left his duty post with others on the night of 21/22 October 1993, consumed liquor outside the police lines, and was then prosecuted for the murder of Head Constable. Though he was acquitted of murder on 30 November 1994, a departmental enquiry found grave indiscipline proved and he was dismissed from service on 10 December 1994, affirmed on departmental appeal on 21 February 1995. The Chhattisgarh High Court held that acquittal in the criminal trial does not bar departmental proceedings on the distinct question of conduct, and that leaving duty premises and consuming liquor while on duty in a disciplined force is grave misconduct warranting dismissal under Regulation 226. The Court found no illegality in the penalty or the appellate order and dismissed the writ petition. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.",
 "summary_verified": "SAF Constable (No. 636, 30th Battalion, Jagdalpur) was suspended after he allegedly left his duty post with others on the night of 21/22 October 1993, consumed liquor outside the police lines, and was then prosecuted for the murder of Head Constable. Though he was acquitted of murder on 30 November 1994, a departmental enquiry found grave indiscipline proved and he was dismissed from service on 10 December 1994, affirmed on departmental appeal on 21 February 1995. The Chhattisgarh High Court held that acquittal in the criminal trial does not bar departmental proceedings on the distinct question of conduct, and that leaving duty premises and consuming liquor while on duty in a disciplined force is grave misconduct warranting dismissal under Regulation 226. The Court found no illegality in the penalty or the appellate order and dismissed the writ petition.",
 "court_quote": "If on that count the Disciplinary Authority proceeded to impose the penalty of dismissal from service, this Court does not find violation of provision contained in Regulation 226 of the Police Regulations.",
 "court_quote_para": "25",
 "confidence": "high",
 "verdict": "accept",
 "verdict_note": "CG HC dismissed writ and upheld SAF constable's dismissal for leaving duty post and consuming liquor; murder acquittal held no bar to departmental action.",
 "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": "2013-09-16",
   "action_type": "Order issued",
   "status": "Concluded",
   "authority": "Chhattisgarh High Court",
   "independence": "External",
   "legal_effect": "Binding",
   "description": "The Chhattisgarh High Court upheld service punishment imposed on police personnel.",
   "disposition": "Disciplinary action · Procedural only",
   "source": "(2014) LabIC 693; (2013) 09 CHH CK 0017",
   "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://www.courtkutchehry.com/judgements/896474/photkooram-vs-state-of-mp-and-others/",
   "link_checked": null
  },
  {
   "url": "(2014) LabIC 693",
   "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-118"
 ],
 "merged_case_id": "GAP3-77-002",
 "officers_named_public": 0,
 "record_flag": null,
 "service": "police",
 "watch": "babuwatch"
}